On May 22, 2008, at 8:39 AM, Johnson, Matthew C. (LNG-HBE) wrote: > [[MCJ]] I suppose that given the open world assumption, someone else > would not know this unless there was an explicit mysch:notLinksTo > assertion or one relied upon the interpretation of a query (that shows > that mysch:linksTo does not exist between pub 2 and pub 3. This is > what > I'm coming around to anyway... Perhaps I'm really struggling with the > notion of open world assumptions vs. closed. In SQL (closed world), > one > frequently uses "select count(*) ..." in order to determine whether a > relationship exists. In the open web, I can understand that one > cannot > assume that a given graph incorporates absolutely every statement > [about > a given thing] but I wonder whether if it is ok to make such an > assumption within one's own [possibly local/corporate] domain? Would > this be considered an abuse of OWL's and RDF's intent? I think that one has to make one's own judgements. The intent of the open world assumption is to not make a global assumption for everybody. Certainly, if within your organization you are comfortable that you have adequate information to make decisions, no one is going to argue with that. -AlanReceived on Friday, 23 May 2008 03:29:04 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 23 May 2008 03:29:11 GMT