W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > March 2008

FW: Re: meta-information about assertions

From: Cristiano Longo <cristiano_longo@yahoo.it>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:25:05 +0000
To: public-wai-ert@w3.org
Message-ID: <267272.41637.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>




An intresting thread about representing the asserter
of something(like and EARL assertion).

cheers,
Cristiano Longo 

--- Cristiano Longo <cristiano_longo@yahoo.it> ha
scritto:

> Data: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:21:34 +0100 (CET)
> Da: Cristiano Longo <cristiano_longo@yahoo.it>
> Oggetto: Re: meta-information about assertions
> A: semantic-web@w3.org
> 
> Thanks all.
> 
> Let me summarize. There is too main trends. 
> The first(Phil Archer, Story Henry) suggests to keep
> track of a "graph" and record graph provenance. If I
> understood good, it means to use QUADS or to put
> into
> my knowledge base only graph uri and graph
> provenance.
> 
> The second trend is to store assertions into rdf
> using
> something like realization, creating for example an
> individual assertion with an asserter and some
> property 
> filled with the assertion.
> 
> I noticed that Evaluation and Report Language, 
> Semantic Web Publishing Vocabulary(WIQA) and Ratings
> Ontology follows this second trend(probably also
> Proof
> Markup Language), providing properties to specify
> the
> asserter of something(e.g. in EARL an agent assert
> that a document passed or not a checkpoint).
> 
> So i think that probably(if not exists), for
> interoperability purposes, we need to formalize
> these
> situations into a main specification(or extending a
> suitable one), preferably grounding it with
> description logics.
> 
> Thank you and sorry for my english,
> Cristiano Longo 
> 
> --- Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de> ha scritto:
> 
> > Hi Cristiano,
> > 
> > as Steffen already said, using the Named Graph
> data
> > model together with 
> > SPARQL is a  practical and well tested way for
> doing
> > this.
> > 
> > Reification is considered dead by most people
> > working on Semantic Web-based 
> > data integration. I think the only people still
> > thinking about using 
> > reification are the new OWL working group and I
> hope
> > that they will also 
> > realize at some point that they are running into
> > problems with this.
> > 
> > If you need a vocabulary for representing
> > meta-information about graphs, one 
> > option is to use the Semantic Web Publishing
> > vocabulary. A framework that 
> > might be interesting for you with regards to trust
> > is the WIQA Web 
> > Information Quality Assessment framework, which
> > employs the Named Graphs 
> > data model and allows you to formulate various
> > information filtering 
> > policies using a policy language that is based on
> > SPARQL.
> > 
> > See:
> > 
> >
> http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/WIQA/index.htm
> >
>
http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/WIQA/browser/index.htm
> > 
> > Cheers
> > 
> > Chris
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Chris Bizer
> > Freie Universitšt Berlin
> > +49 30 838 54057
> > chris@bizer.de
> > www.bizer.de
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Steffen Staab" <staab@uni-koblenz.de>
> > To: "Cristiano Longo" <cristiano_longo@yahoo.it>
> > Cc: <semantic-web@w3.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 9:13 AM
> > Subject: Re: meta-information about assertions
> > 
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > here is a WWW08 paper about this:
> > >
> >
>
http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~staab/Research/Publications/2008/WWW2008-MetaKnowledge.pdf
> > > and here is its implementation:
> > >
> >
>
http://www.uni-koblenz.de/FB4/Institutes/IFI/AGStaab/Research/MetaKnowledge
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > > Cristiano Longo schrieb:
> > >> Hi all,
> > >> i'm trying to merge rdf(more specifically OWL)
> > graphs
> > >> from different sources using collaborative
> > filtering
> > >> and trust related technologies. But my question
> > is:
> > >> what is the proper way to encode a "meta
> > assertion"
> > >> like "A says X about B", in order to deal with
> > >> contraddictory assertions?
> > >>
> > >> Reification? Using SKOS? Something else?
> > >>
> > >> Thank you in advance.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>       ___________________________________
> > >> L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla
> > con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: 
> > >> http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>       ___________________________________ 
> L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con
> la nuova Yahoo! Mail:
> http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
> 



      ___________________________________ 
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2008 17:42:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 4 March 2008 17:42:47 GMT