W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > June 2007

Re: owl:sameAs use/misuse/abuse Re: homonym URIs

From: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:10:02 +0100
Message-ID: <82593ac00706140910p3eef10ddne7c2ca41fb486c86@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Pierre-Antoine Champin" <swlists-040405@champin.net>
Cc: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@danbri.org>, "Bernard Vatant" <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, semantic-web@w3.org

Hello!


> Consider that I work for two different companies (in the morning and in
> the afternoon).
> Both have a URI for me. Company 1 would state
>
> comp1:champin emp:name "Champin" ;
>               emp:salary "1000" .
>
> Company 2, on the other hand, would state
>
> comp2:champin emp:name "Champin" ;
>               emp:salary "2000" .
>
> using the same standardized properties, which happen to be functional.
>
> It would seem legitimate to state that
>
> comp1:champin owl:sameAs comp2:champin .
>
> But that would lead to inconsistency (two different values for a
> functional property).
>
> Both URIs denote me, but not the same "me", only the "me" I am from the
> point of view of each company.
>

Well, that's exactly where you need to "contextualize" information.
These two statements come from different places, and you need to track
this context information as well - the first is "what company 1 states
about me" and the second is "what company 2 states about me", and the
two are relevant - the point is that they both speak about you
(therefore legitimating the use of owl:sameAs). That's exactly where
named graphs come into place.

Best,
Yves
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2007 16:23:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:57 UTC