W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > July 2008

Re: How do you deprecate URIs? Re: OWL-DL and linked data

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 11:02:56 +0100
Message-Id: <7F919053-DFEC-46AC-B900-C7B0D0AD53C4@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On 9 Jul 2008, at 10:28, Hugh Glaser wrote:

> Thanks guys, a really interesting and important discussion.
> However, after the last couple of postings I have the feeling I may  
> agree
> with both of you.
> Is that possible?

Why not?

How's this for a manifesto:

1) It sucks not to have common mapping infrastructure in the semantic  
web languages that is both simple and robust.
2) sameAs does some things one would want from a mapping  
infrastructure, thus people will tend to use it regardless of any  
subsequent issues
3) Something Should Be Done.

Note on 2, if sameAs gets hijacked it gets hijacked. C'est la  
technical vie. However, I would think that it's pretty inadequate  
even as a substitute, so, there's still some technical work (both in  
developing language/infrastructure and in developing methodologies)  
to be done.

To succeed in solving this problem, there really needs to be some  
organizational force. I started an essay on OWLED:	

A few choice quotes:
	"""the point is to advance the state of the deployed art"""

	"""I like OWLED to be a conversation between users, implementors,  
theorists, and other stakeholders. The main goal is to advance the  
state of OWL. Communication is important, but so is action. As much  
as possible, I like OWLED to work from consensus to produce  
substantial changes.""""

	""""Obviously, OWLED cannot channel the entire OWL community. But it  
has been a surprisingly coherent voice and I think a voice with a  
great deal of legitimacy. Obviously, it bears the stamp, both direct  
and indirect, of those who have organized it, and of the steering  
committee. But more it bears the stamp of those willing to do work.  
It's fine to come show off your stuff and try to attract users.  
That's a great thing to do. But if you want to get other people to do  
work (e.g., produce/support a W3C submission or implement your  
extensions in their reasoner) you have to do a lot of work. You have  
to show that its not so hard to implement and that it will, in fact,  
be widely used. Being an implementor of a serious system (or working  
with one) helps! Having funding (and labor) to share also helps."""

	"""If something can help grow the community, people will tend to  
support it if there is a clearly sensible path to doing so."""

This particular task is pretty far down my personal list for two  
reasons: 1) I've a lot of a lot on my plate and 2) I don't see any  
core community with the wherewithal to purse this. I suggest RDF-EDs  
pretty regularly and offer to help out but no joy.

Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 10:00:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:29:40 UTC