W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > July to September 2007

Re: declaredAs

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 15:03:18 -0500
Message-Id: <p06230917c2e5172a3196@[10.100.0.67]>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Cc: John McClure <jmcclure@hypergrove.com>, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, Owl Dev <public-owl-dev@w3.org>

>Pat Hayes wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>But rdf:ID doesn't get you *any sort of
>>>>declaration*. It's *just a funny way of making an assertion*.
>>>
>>>Nope, I don't agree -- I don't see this in the specs anywhere.
>>
>>Well, the RDF specs say explicitly that RDF consists entirely of 
>>assertions, they give a normative semantics which defines the 
>>assertions, and they do not mention declarations anywhere. Seems 
>>pretty damn clear to me.
>
>Yup, if you're looking for "declarations", you might try to see it 
>social wrappings around pure formal RDF. Like if I use RDFS/OWL to 
>describe some classes and properties, then write that out as an 
>RDF/XML UTF-8 document and publish it, then mail semantic-web@w3.org 
>and say ... 'hey everyone, use my new ontology'. Perhaps after all 
>that we could say the classes and properties have been declared? RDF 
>no more has declarations than it has lies; but people can lie and 
>declare using RDF.

I think you are mixing up asserting - a speech act, claiming a 
sentence to be true by saying (or publishing) it - and declaring in 
the sense I think its being used here, analogous to a declaration in 
a programming language. The latter has some kind of special 
significance for parsing and errors.

I agree RDF doesn't have explicit assertion or denial, etc., but 
there is an emerging social/Web consensus that publication is 
tantamount to assertion, which I think is what you are talking about 
here.

Pat

>
><rdf:Property rdf:ID="permits"/> in an RDF/XML document 
>http://example.com/somerdf ...might be read as somehow ensuring that 
>the URI for the term "permits" that it expands to is new, previously 
>unused, etc. And I guess this is why it gets seen as a declaration, 
>since it gives (illusory) impression we can be sure that whoever 
>wrote this is the first to do so. That assumptio is a mistake, since 
>the interaction with xml:base allows pre-existing properties and 
>classes to be further described via rdf:ID.
>
>cheers,
>
>Dan
>
>ps. testcase:
>
><rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>   xml:base="http://creativecommons.org/ns#"
>   xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>>
><rdf:Property rdf:ID="permits"
>dc:description="assertions about cc:permits go here, but if anyone 
>'declared' it, it wasn't me."/>
></rdf:RDF>
>
>gives 2 triples:
>
>http://creativecommons.org/ns#permits 
>http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type 
>http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property .
>
>http://creativecommons.org/ns#permits 
>http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/description	"assertions about 
>cc:permits go here, but if anyone 'declared' it, it wasn't me." .


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Sunday, 12 August 2007 20:03:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 10 December 2014 20:07:17 UTC