Re: schema.org/sameThingAs proposal

Which of those corresponds to the "same real-world entity"?  I guess I
could see Thing/equivalentThing as an alternative name.

-jason


On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>wrote:

> On 6/22/12 11:21 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
>
>> The idea is similar to W3C's existing 'owl:sameAs' relationship, but
>> more flexible / loose, since with schema.org markup (and
>> rdfa/microdata in general) it is very common to see mixing of
>> identifiers for things, and identifiers for pages-about-those-things.
>>
>> Basically all sameThingAs says is, "whether these are direct or
>> indirect identifiers doesn't matter for now; they point to the single,
>> same real-world entity".
>>
> So you want:
>
> Equivalence by Name -- sameAs
> Equivalence by Value -- content equivalence basically
> Equivalence by Intent -- nebulous layer above which could carry the
> semantics you seek i.e., the are loosely equivalent in some way understood
> by the claim maker, at best.
>
> Thus, Instead of "same" you would have "equivalent" where the other
> equivalences become subproperties that hook nicely into the pattern already
> established re. rdf:type.
>
> So you have:
>
> equivalentByName
> equivalentByValue
> equivalentByIntent.
>
> "same" is a problem vector for those that see the label and then interpret
> relationship semantics literally. You've already seen the distraction it
> creates for Linked Data :-)
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/**blog/~kidehen<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen>
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/**112399767740508618350/about<https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about>
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/**kidehen<http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen>
>
>
>
>
>
>