W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2010

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

From: Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:25:51 +0200
Message-ID: <4C2CEBBF.20601@gmail.com>
To: Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com>
CC: Tim Finin <finin@cs.umbc.edu>, Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>, Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, nathan@webr3.org, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On 07/01/2010 09:11 PM, Henry Story wrote:
> 
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
> 
> On 1 Jul 2010, at 21:03, Tim Finin wrote:
> 
>> On 7/1/10 2:51 PM, Henry Story wrote:
>>> ...
>>> So just as a matter of interest, imagine a new syntax came along that allowed literals in
>>> subject position, could you not write a serialiser for it that turned
>>>    "123" length 3 .
>>> Into
>>>  _:b owl:sameAs "123";
>>>      length 3.
>>> ?
>>> So that really you'd have to do no work at all?
>>> Just wondering....
>>
>> Isn't owl:sameAs defined to be a relation between two
>> URI references?  
> 
> Not sure.

It is, this won't work under OWL DL... In OWL Full if I think it will.
I asked about this recently on this list...

> In any case I suppose it would be simple to crete such an identity relation. 
> 
>> Even if not, it is symmetric and
>> would have the above imply {"123" owl:sameAs _:b .}
> 
> It does indeed imply that, though you can't write it out like that 
> in most serialisations, other than N3.
> 
> And being able to write it out, makes it easy to explain what symmetry means.
> 
> I think people keep confusing syntax and semantics for some reason, even on
> the semantic web.
> 
> Henry


Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 19:26:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:20 UTC