Re: Combining Linked Data HTTP URIs and HTML5 WebSocket URIs

On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 20:22 -0600, richard.hancock@3kbo.com wrote:
[ . . . ]
> It would seem logical to use owl:sameAs to combine the HTTP URIs and the
> Websocket URIs to assert that they are referring to the same individuals,
> but is that valid?
> 
> I.e. can the following two statements be made in OWL?
> 
> <http://www.3kbo.com:8080/servers/1> owl:sameAs
> <ws://www.3kbo.com:9090/servers/1> .
> 
> <http://www.3kbo.com:8080/servers/2> owl:sameAs
> <ws://www.3kbo.com:9090/servers/2> .

What are these URIs intended to identify?  If they are intended to
identify the exact same thing in all cases, they it would be valid to
say they are owl:sameAs.  However, often in such cases they will be the
same for the purposes of one application, but *not* the same for the
purposes of other applications.  

For example, if <http://www.3kbo.com:8080/servers/1> and
<ws://www.3kbo.com:9090/servers/1> are only ever intended to identify
the exact same server, then they are owl:sameAs each other.  But if
<http://www.3kbo.com:8080/servers/1> is intended to identify that server
*as accessed via HTTP*, and the other identifies the same server *as
accessed via web sockets*, then they are *not* owl:sameAs each other.
For example, you may want to track access times of
<ws://www.3kbo.com:9090/servers/1> via web sockets separately from
access times of <http://www.3kbo.com:8080/servers/1> using HTTP.

See the "Owl:sameAs considered harmful to provenance" talk by James
McCusker and Deborah McGuinness:
http://www.slideshare.net/jpmccusker/owlsameas-considered-harmful-to-provenance 



-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
http://dbooth.org/

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of his employer.

Received on Saturday, 19 November 2011 13:49:18 UTC