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

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

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 18:21:07 -0400
Message-ID: <51479353.7020600@dbooth.org>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Erich Gombocz <egombocz@io-informatics.com>, 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>
On 03/18/2013 01:25 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>
> On Mar 17, 2013, at 8:40 PM, David Booth wrote:
[ . . . ]
>> In the semantic web world, these "contextual scopes" are RDF
>> graphs.
>
> No, they aren't. That interpretation of RDF graphs is in direct
> violation of the RDF specifications. RDF graphs are simply sets of
> assertions, all in a non-contextual (and non-indexical) logic with no
> contextual sensitivity.

I think you're selling your work short.  AFAICT, the notion of context 
can work beautifully with the existing RDF Semantics.  One way is to say 
that the context is the given interpretation, by which an RDF graph's 
truth-value is to be determined.  That would make that graph's 
truth-value relative to that interpretation, just as the RDF Semantics 
currently defines it.  Another way is to say that the context is the 
given RDF graph whose truth-value is to be determined.  That would also 
make the truth-value relative to that RDF graph, just as the RDF 
Semantics currently defines it.

The reason I prefer to think of the context as being the given RDF graph 
is that (for me) a common usage mode is to start with an RDF graph and 
use the RDF semantics to determine the set of interpretations that allow 
that graph to be true.  This allows useful work to be performed.  For 
example, given an RDF graph containing a URI whose resource identity I 
wish to determine, I can turn the RDF Semantics crank and find out that 
that URI must denote an :Apple .

David
Received on Monday, 18 March 2013 22:21:36 UTC

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