W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > March 2013

Re: owl:sameAs - Is it used in a right way?

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:16:29 -0500
Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>, Andrea Splendiani <andrea.splendiani@deri.org>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Jeremy J Carroll <jjc@syapse.com>, Umutcan ŞİMŞEK <s.umutcan@gmail.com>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, w3c semweb HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3CFB3D53-CB7E-4A3F-96A1-836D8FA5538B@ihmc.us>
To: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
Peter, greetings.

I know you can do the graph-as-context trick you describe, and you are not alone. This style of using RDF does however directly violate the RDF specifications, and so is not conformant. So there is a risk of your content being misused and misunderstood by RDF users who are unaware of your extra-RDF conventions for keeping contexts separate. 

Pat Hayes

On Mar 17, 2013, at 10:45 PM, Peter Ansell wrote:

> On 18 March 2013 12:50, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:
>> 
>> On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:22 PM, Peter Ansell wrote:
>> 
>>> On 18 March 2013 09:14, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Can someone *please* tell me what a context is??
>>>> 
>>>> My null hypothesis is that when someone says "context" they either don't
>>>> know what they are talking about, or are too lazy to say. Both these cases
>>>> are deadly for clear communication on the web.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> One interpretation may be RDF Graphs, see RDF-1.1 drafts for the
>>> current definition of that [1].
>> 
>> Nope, RDF graphs do not, according to the current (and likely future) specs, define contexts (in any useful sense), because they cannot change the interpretations of IRIs.
> 
> The WebArch document (rather hopefully) assigns complete
> responsibility for assigning the intended interpretation of an IRI to
> the owner (based on the IRI scheme). This is not how names are
> traditionally defined and refined in science, so there is a
> fundamental clash between the two philosophies there.
> 
> Even if one would theoretically agree that the broad intended meaning
> for an IRI is not changing, there are very simple ways to implement
> context-sensitive queries using different RDF graphs. Different RDF
> Graphs can be used for the same query to contrast the differences
> across either time or some other dimension where differences in the
> statements related to an IRI changes the exact interpretation of the
> IRI. Personally I use owl:versionIRI for the version (read context)
> identification but there are certainly other ways to identify context
> and simply map the context to RDF Graphs. This makes for a simple to
> manage system that matches my groups intended semantics when a
> scientist updates the dataset. Ie, the version changes and one may
> choose to use a previous version (where the version is identified as
> an IRI which maps directly to an RDF Graph) if it is necessary, but
> IRIs are consistent across most updates to make the process
> manageable.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Peter
> 
> 

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Monday, 18 March 2013 04:16:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:01 UTC