Re: Property "geographic identifier" in LOCN

Hi Raphael,

>> Can should show me harmful examples of re-use of common terms from
>> popular LOD vocabularies?

Yes, see the example mentioned before with geo:lat and geo:long at 
:http://stko.geog.ucsb.edu/location_linked_data

>> Providing equivalentX axioms trigger the same "stability over the time"
>> problem when the target vocabulary evolve so you should anyway be
>> concern by this issue.

Keep in mind that those are your own local axioms. You can remove such a 
relation if you feel that it is too strong. Moreover, in most cases 
equivalence relations will be too strong anyway and you would most 
likely aim at more complex alignment patterns.

Best,
Krzysztof

On 01/10/2014 10:48 AM, Raphaël Troncy wrote:
> Hello Pascal,
>
>> If you're using the exactly same meaning (wrt. formal semantics), and
>> can guarantee that this is stable over time (the vocabulary you use may
>> get reworked), *and* you can guarantee that your twist on the meaning
>> (which you introduce through your reuse) will not cause any
>> inconsistencies if used jointly with all other usages elsewhere (which
>> you can't control), then there is indeed no problem with reuse.
>
> Providing equivalentX axioms trigger the same "stability over the time"
> problem when the target vocabulary evolve so you should anyway be
> concern by this issue.
>
>> However I would claim that you can essentially never guarantee this. And
>> even if you can, guaranteeing it is probably much more work than it's
>> worth :)
>
> Can should show me harmful examples of re-use of common terms from
> popular LOD vocabularies?
> Best regards.
>
>    Raphaël
>


-- 
Krzysztof Janowicz

Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
5806 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060

Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu
Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net

Received on Saturday, 11 January 2014 01:45:34 UTC