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

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

From: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 12:53:35 +0100
Message-ID: <82593ac00807090453l2748b9a7w13166e2e1942fbea@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@danbri.org>
Cc: "Richard Cyganiak" <richard@cyganiak.de>, "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, "Peter Ansell" <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, "semantic-web at W3C" <semantic-web@w3c.org>, public-lod@w3.org

> If the best data / tools you have suggest that two docs/datasets are
> describing the selfsame entity, using owl:sameAs seems fine, even if you
> have a secret hunch you're only perhaps 95% confident of the data quality or
> tool reliability. If the best information you have instead is telling you
> "these two documents seem to be talking about more or less the same notion",
> then owl:sameAs probably isn't for you: it doesn't communicate what you
> know. Which of these situations you're in might be something of a judgement
> call, but it should be a judgement call grounded in clarity about what a use
> of owl:sameAs is claiming.

Just jumping on that part. My particular use-case is that I have an
algorithm to automatically derive owl:sameAs between two datasets [1].
This algorithm gives a really low-rate of false-positives after
evaluation. However, whenever this tool publish an owl:sameAs
statement, it has a "confidence" associated with it. Is there any
"standard" way to publish this confidence, as well as the sameAs
statement? I can also think about further data that I may want to
publish and which I can quantify the accuracy (eg. RDF statements
derived from audio or video content).

[1] http://events.linkeddata.org/ldow2008/papers/18-raimond-sutton-automatic-interlinking.pdf
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 11:54:13 UTC

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