W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Explicit Disambiguation Via RDF bNodes, more Process

From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 23:23:09 -0600
Message-Id: <200204270523.g3R5N9v04931@localhost.localdomain>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
[SNIP]

I'm sorry, but I've seen all sorts of variations of this solution (most of 
them, involve unambiguousProperties from the bNode), and I don't see what use 
it is whatsoever.

I think this solution is essentially what the Topic Maps insist on.

It does not resolve any ambiguity whatsoever in itself.  We can have arguments 
about the "meaning" of that blank node just as ferociously as we argue about 
HTTP URIs, except that these arguments would be more surreal, and consesnsus 
would be, IMO, harder to construct.

Again, let us not try solving in our computer representation systems what 
millenia of philosophy has not solved in the real world.  The semantic Web 
seems more attainable and useful to me if it is understood to contain all 
forms of ambiguity and conflict, and we resign ourselves to humans stepping in 
often and using diplomacy or force to put a local resolution in place.


> So take your pick: (1) use this approach, (2) allow some messy merged
> graphs, or (3) achieve consensus.  (or find a better approach.)
> Personally, I'd like (3) but I don't know how to do it.  Maybe when
> people start actually merging graphs, there will be enough social
> pressure on whoever looks the messiest to get them to shape up and
> conform.  I wonder who that will be....

Imagine if someone with the right tools (time machine, mega-computer, 
philosophical famulus, etc.) were able to make a representation of the 
knowledge graph of England, Spain, France and Italy.  Or pick the metropoles 
of the middle Saracen cultures, if you prefer, or Augustan Rome, etc.  Wouln't 
that graph be the most frightful mess?  Would it not be full of every species 
of ambiguity, confusion, fact, fiction, error, deception, brilliance and 
stupidity?  Does this make that graph any less useful?  Do you think 
civilization would have advanced as surely otherwise?

As long as we're humans "shaping up" and "conforming" are anathema to 
knowledge.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                           Fourthought, Inc.
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com           http://fourthought.com
http://4Suite.org                     http://uche.ogbuji.net
Track chair, XML/Web Services One (San Jose, Boston): 
http://www.xmlconference.com/
RDF Query using Versa - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-thi
nk10/index.html
WSDL and the Wild, Wild West - http://adtmag.com/article.asp?id=6004
XML, The Model Driven Architecture, and RDF @ XML Europe - 
http://www.xmleurope.com/2002/kttrack.asp#themodel
Received on Saturday, 27 April 2002 01:32:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:53 GMT