- From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:09:23 +0100
- To: 'Dave Reynolds' <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hi Dave, Nice email. Just picking up on this bit ... > I then might have: > > ex:resourceC ex:classifiedAs ex:PersonS; > foaf:name 'Alistair Miles' . > > By the way, having written out this example I'd argue that if > you want to > build in some links between RDFS and SKOS then some official > replacement > for the "ex:classifiedAs" I invented above would be much higher up my > priority list than "denotesSameAs". What would be the semantics of such a property, and how would it be different from e.g. skos:broaderInstantive? Al. > > > > ex:resourceA a skos:Concept; > > skos:prefLabel 'Alistair Miles'; > > skos:scopeNote 'My mate Al.' > > . > > > > ex:resourceB a foaf:Person; > > foaf:name 'Alistair Miles'; > > foaf:mbox <mailto:a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk> > . > > ... the burining questions are: > > Are these two resources fundamentally different in nature, or not? > > Are these two resources at different levels of abstraction, or not? > > My point in the last email [1] was that, it *does not* seem reasonable to > allow for example: > > ex:resourceC a skos:Concept; > skos:prefLabel 'Alistair Miles'; > skos:scopeNote 'My mate Al.'; > a foaf:Person; > foaf:name 'Alistair Miles'; > foaf:mbox <mailto:a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk> > . > > ... intuitively because properties like 'skos:scopeNote' seem appropriate to > describe an abstract concept, but not to describe a person. > > I.e. in logic speak the classes skos:Concept and foaf:Person should be > disjoint. > > What Dave said in an earlier email (I think) was that I should not think of > ex:resourceB as an actual person, but as an abstract entity, with the same > metaphysical status as ex:resourceA (i.e. they are both abstractions). > > But intuitively I do think of ex:resourceB as an actual person (should I > change that?), and that feeling is the basis for my assertion above. And > even if I do accept they are both abstractions, one *feels* to me more > abstract than the other. > > Are we getting closer or farther away? > > Al. > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Oct/0000.html > > --- > Alistair Miles > Research Associate > CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory > Building R1 Room 1.60 > Fermi Avenue > Chilton > Didcot > Oxfordshire OX11 0QX > United Kingdom > Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk > Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440
Received on Friday, 1 October 2004 14:09:56 UTC