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 13:04:31 +0100
Message-Id: <F0A6C9C7-EC5F-43D7-8F36-A279961B8D7B@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>, public-lod@w3.org
To: "Yves Raimond" <yves.raimond@gmail.com>

On 9 Jul 2008, at 12:53, Yves Raimond wrote:

>> 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?

No. OWL2 allows for axiom annotations, but these tend to look fairly  
ugly in RDF (due to reification).

If you wanted to support some inference with those, you may want to  
try Pronto:
	http://pellet.owldl.com/pronto

Pavel and I are looking for test data.

We also used axiom annotations to associate probabilities with  
assertions, see:
	http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System
esp.
	http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/ 
Annotation_System#Probabilistic_extension

You might also look at my reificaiton table:
	http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Reification_Alternatives

Unfortunately, no one has added any examples or even really exhibited  
interest :)

You can see the data uri trick:
	http://www.w3.org/mid/9B7E471F-A8E0-42CB-A4A1-F850454F54E8@cs.man.ac.uk

> 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).

Pavel and I would be interested in that work.

Hope this helped.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 12:02:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:20:40 UTC