W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > July 2003

Re: (Round 2) Proposed Extensions to OWL

From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 19:58:47 -0400
Message-ID: <002701c34676$09fe6ca0$6401a8c0@tbp1>
To: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@mitre.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

[Roger L. Costello]

> Tom, I am still fuzzy about your proposal.  I need to see a concrete

Roger, I think we are tackling two different problems, although they are
closely related.  I was working out how one could make an RDF statement that
two LengthMeasurementValues are actually equivalent because one is the
transform of the other.  I think I have worked that out in a satisfactory
way for specific instances.

There are several other things one might like to do, and I think you may be
trying to combine them without realizing it -

1) Make a statement of such equivalence without having to create a specific
instance of a transformation for each case.

2) Provide a means by which a processor could infer the equivalence of two
values (with their units included, of course)

3) Provide instructions to some processor so that if queried, it could
return sensible answers, e.g.,
   a) Yes, the two are equivalent or No, they are not.
   b) A length of 1 Mile is equivalent to a length of 1.62 Kilometers with a
precision of '...'.

Remember, we cannot instruct a pure RDF processor to "do" anything.  It
takes statements and organizes them.  It may try to infer new statements and
add them to the data store.  So 3) is not really in the realm of RDF,
although presumably we would want to use RDF to specify the transform to

So which one of these is most on your mind? They are different tasks.


Tom P
Received on Thursday, 10 July 2003 00:54:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:46 UTC