W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-urw3@w3.org > July 2007

RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3] ... three questions based on the last telecon]

From: Giorgos Stoilos <gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:43:32 +0300
Message-Id: <200707301143.l6UBhWQo004291@manolito.image.ece.ntua.gr>
To: "'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'" <klaskey@gmu.edu>
Cc: <public-xg-urw3@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kathryn Blackmond Laskey [mailto:klaskey@gmu.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 8:51 PM
> To: Giorgos Stoilos; Peter.Vojtas@mff.cuni.cz; 'Ken Laskey'
> Cc: 'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'; public-xg-urw3@w3.org; 'Umberto Straccia'
> Subject: RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3] ... three
> questions based on the last telecon]
> 
> >...in order for the system to
> >return the exact height of each person and then a local processing method
> to
> >fuzzify the heights...
> 
> That is assuming the exact heights are available.  For many of the
> problems we are concerned about, there will be values in the
> database, but we cannot assume they are correct.

I see that this is the case in other types of applications, like situation
awareness and I fully concur. But I don't think there is much to trouble in
the aforementioned case. There is insignificant difference if someone 178cm
is inserted as 179cm or even 180cm in our use case.

> 
> The database may contain accurate height measures for some of the
> people, and either null values (height is unknown) or imputed values
> (a guess or inference based on other available data for the person)
> for some of the people.  Maybe the information is out of date.  If a
> person is 19 years old, we cannnot assume that a 6-year-old height
> measurement is accurate.  On the other hand, if the person is 30
> years old, then the height 6 years ago is probably fine.
> 

I don't understand your point here. Are you suggesting that uncertainty
could solve these issues?

-gstoil

> K
Received on Monday, 30 July 2007 11:43:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 April 2008 09:52:44 GMT