- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:25:54 +0100
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>
Bijan Parsia wrote: > > On 7 Jul 2008, at 22:57, Richard H. McCullough wrote: > >> I haven't been following the "deprecate URIs" thread, so forgive me if >> I'm being repetitious. >> 1. everything is contextual. But that's no excuse for being sloppy >> with meanings. >> 2. ambiguity is not inevitable -- it is avoided by clearly identifying >> context. >> 2. OWL:SameAs (like mKR:is) means identical -- two names (aliases) >> which mean the same thing. Let's not corrupt the meaning of this term. > > +500000 > > I keep meaning to start a thread against the mapping use of sameAs. It > causes a lot of issues as you move to greater expressivity. There was recently an extensive thread about it, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2008May/0078.html "Managing co-reference". I keep meaning to engage more with that, because I'm also worried about seeing the vividly crisp meaning of owl:sameAs weakened to mean "kinda sorta mostly same-ish thing, for most purposes". The idea floating for an 'rdf:sameAs' also filled me with dread. Call me old fashioned, but owl:sameAs means what it means as defined in the OWL specs. If people are going to miss-use it, I'd rather they did so by admitting they're publishing possibly-false-claims, than by trying to stretch and bend it to have some new "as used in real life" vaguer meaning. cheers, Dan -- http://danbri.org/
Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2008 15:26:45 UTC