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

Re: Drilling into the LOD Cloud

From: Aldo Bucchi <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:34:25 -0300
Message-ID: <7a4ebe1d0809291234l6275c85bnd85845b57d150572@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@danbri.org>
Cc: public-lod@w3.org

On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
>
> Damian Steer wrote:
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> [sorry, forgot to reply-all]
>>
>> Peter Ansell wrote:
>>
>> | That is fine for classes, but how do you map individuals without
>> metadata side-effects?
>>
>> Looking at my previous answer again I think I should take another run at
>> this  :-)
>>
>> One way of thinking about equivalence is in terms of substitution: if :x
>> :equiv :y when is it safe to substitute :x with :y?
>>
>> The default is: it's not safe (obviously).
>>
>> :x equivalentClass :y -> safe when used as a class (e.g. rdf:type :x)
>> :x sameAs :y -> always safe (watch out!)
>> :x sameConceptAs :y -> safe in subject positions
>
> do you mean subject in the 'topic, dc:subject' sense, rather than
> subject/predicate/object sense? On first reading I thought you meant the
> latter, which would be problematic since any inverse of property can flip
> values into 'object' role. So assuming the former, I quite agree.
>
> Also thanks for expanding on what I meant. I was indeed picking a strong
> example to emphasise my (under articulated) case. Using an owl:sameAs claim
> between independently developed classes and properties is almost always
> misleading, confusing and untrue. So yup I agree that application-specific
> properties such as these are often more useful.
>
> Also btw folks there is no such thing as dc:author. It was changed in the
> mid-late 1990s to be dc:creator, so as to better cover non-written creations
> such as images, museum artifacts etc. So best to avoid/fix it in mail
> threads before 'dc:author' ends up getting mentioned in books etc.

Oops.
Made a quick search and I don't use author anywhere in my codebase ( I
use creator ).
But for some reason it is still sticking in my mind ( band, music, author )
If it shows up in a book I'll feel really guilty, as the material
"author" of that crime

( or should I say creator )...

This brings up another point ( re. retroactive edition ). Why haven't
we found a replacement for mailing lists?
Dog fooding anyone?
( rhetoric question perhaps. don't reply on this thread or it will go
seriously off topic ).

Thx,
A


>
> cheers,
>
> Dan
>>
>> :x sameWorkAs :y -> safe for author, creation date
>> :x sameManifestationAs :y -> safe for the the above, and length (?)
>>
>> Does that help?
>>
>> Damian
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>>
>> iD8DBQFI4NdRAyLCB+mTtykRAppqAJ9kzkWgcWt0zeWfWdMfWwqtdhoblwCeNCWH
>> 54J20+PaNd1xmCmcFLs9DN8=
>> =/gW2
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>>
>
>
>



-- 
:::: Aldo Bucchi ::::
+56 9 7623 8653
skype:aldo.bucchi
twitter:aldonline
http://aldobucchi.com/
http://univrz.com/
Received on Monday, 29 September 2008 19:35:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:20:42 UTC