- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:12:36 +0000
- To: "OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 27 Nov 2007, at 15:28, ewallace@cme.nist.gov wrote: > Ivan Herman wrote: >> Well... I did meet one example. DCMI (the organization behind the >> Dublin >> Core metadata) is having problems exactly on that. They have an >> abstract >> model document[1] where they speak about 'value surrogate' that can >> either be a literal or non-literal. When mapping this abstract >> model to >> RDF[2] they hit this problem (eg, is the value of a dcterm:subject >> property a literal or not). > > I personally think that this example illustrates plain bad modelling > practice. Can you point to some discussion of the motivations for this > choice which might modify my view? Data/Object Punning might arise from *changes* in modelling, for example, lifting from a weaker representation (RDF or a RDBMS) or a legacy representation (e.g., Old Skool DC). While it might be bad modelling, I find it difficult to argue that these situations shouldn't be expressible (e.g., as a transition point between one style of representation and another). Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2007 17:11:08 UTC