- From: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 11:12:08 +1000
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
2009/7/22 Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Toby Inkster<tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote: >> On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 19:52 +0300, Bernhard Schandl wrote: >> >>> > I would say: Never assert sameAs. It's just too big a hammer. >>> > Instead use a wider palette of relationships to connect entities >>> > to other ones. >>> >>> which ones would you recommend? >> >> skos:exactMatch = asserts that the two resources represent the same >> concept, but does not assert that all triples containing the first >> resource are necessarily true when the second resource is substituted >> in. > > I'm having trouble parsing this one. I don't know what concepts are, > but they are an odd sort of thing if they can be the same, but can't > be substituted. I find it quite rational to not want to substitute someone elses descriptive version of a thing, but still be able to say that although the descriptions aren't compatible, the things are actually the same and someone else may want to substitute the things in future, but they are not forced to in anyway. Cheers, Peter
Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 01:12:43 UTC