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: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 00:31:35 -0500
Cc: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, 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: <FCAE2790-7201-4B30-88CD-4C55A0285551@ihmc.us>
To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>

On Mar 18, 2013, at 4:02 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:

> On 18/03/2013 04:16, Pat Hayes wrote:
>> 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.
> Hi Pat,
> (I'd taken such usage to be undefined by rather than directly violating the RDF specifications.)

It is a possibly delicate point. The RDF 1.1 WG had members who were working under the graph-as-context assumption, so indeed this way  of thinking is definitely in use out the wild wide world. Still, it is non-conformant. 

> But is it still OK to use the graph-as-context trick to allow that different graphs are interpreted under interpretations with differing IEXT mappings (per http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#interp)?

No, not really. Each interpretation fixes all this stuff for all IRIs, and there isn't any provision in the spec for allowing any of this change contextually. Its easy to tweak the semantics to make it work, but it does need a tweak. 

> This is covered only in the formal parts, which I read as expressed with respect to a particular graph and interpretation, so I *think* that would be OK.

See my reply to David for more on this. 


> #g
> --

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 Wednesday, 20 March 2013 05:32:02 UTC

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