W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > January 2001

RE: data smushing

From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 12:02:17 +0100
To: " - *GK@Dial.pipex.com" <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
Cc: " - *www-rdf-interest@w3.org" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0006800038174498000002L082*@MHS>
> > > If
> > >    [nodeX, propertyY, whatever] and;
> > >    [nodeY, propertyY, whatever] and;
> > >    [nodeX, rdf:type, nodeZ] and;
> > >    [nodeY, rdf:type, nodeZ] and;
> > >    [propertyY, atMostOneEntityValue, "yes"];
> > > then
> > >    smush (nodeX, nodeY).
> >
> >
> >Isn't 'smushing' just unification hacking; am I missing something?
>
> That's an interesting thought.
>
> I think, however, that there's more to smushing (which I understand to mean
> detection of equivalent resources from their description and/or usage).
>
> Unification uses a sequence of variable->subexpression substitutions to
> make two expressions the same, and is based entirely on the form of the
> expressions concerned.

I think we just look to the same thing from different perspectives.
Suppose we have the facts
{Maaike|ed:human|}   i.e. Maaike is a human
{Maaike|ed:female|}  i.e. Maaike is a female
{Goedele|ed:woman|}  i.e. Goedele is a woman

then, because "human and female defines woman", we would like to detect
{Maaike|ed:woman|}

One can of course use different mechanisms to find that "smushed data".
One possible way is using an explicit description of what we accept
{{?X|ed:human|}|e:impliedBy|
  {?X|ed:woman|}}

{{?X|ed:female|}|e:impliedBy|
  {?X|ed:woman|}}

{{?X|ed:woman|}|e:impliedBy|
  {?X|ed:human|}
  {?X|ed:female|}}

and so on ...
to find a proof
{{Maaike|ed:woman|}|e:impliedBy|
  {Maaike|ed:human|}
  {Maaike|ed:female|}}

which can be passed as evidence.

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 4 January 2001 06:03:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:47 GMT