RE: owl:sameAs temptation

What about using dc:subject as an annotation property on the class like so:

foaf:Person a owl:Class ;
	dc:subject dbpedia:Person .
dbpedia:Person a owl:Thing .

If dc:subject seems a little off, you could use a weaker property like rdfs:seeAlso.

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antoine Zimmermann [mailto:antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 3:00 AM
> To: Sarven Capadisli
> Cc: Linking Open Data
> Subject: Re: owl:sameAs temptation
> 
> If you care about what the OWL spec says and don't want to write
> something invalid (or inconsistent), you first have to distinguish
> between OWL DL and OWL Full.
> 
> In OWL Full, everything is an instance of owl:Thing. Classes,
> Properties, Literals, Datatypes, etc are instances of owl:Thing. Even
> owl:Thing itself is an instance of owl:Thing. That is to say that
> owl:Thing is equivalent to rdfs:Resource. So, owl:sameAs can be used
> for
> anything.
> Which does not mean that it should!
> 
> In OWL DL, there are restrictions but since OWL 2 is standard, it's
> been
> more complicated. owl:Thing does not contain classes. So, in principle,
> owl:sameAs must not be used to relate an individual to a class. But OWL
> 2 introduced the idea of "punning" which says that you can use a *class
> name* as an *individual name*. So, for example, this is legal in OWL 2
> DL (Turtle syntax):
> 
> :c  a  owl:Class .
> :x  a  :c .
> :x  owl:sameAs  :c .
> 
> The fact is that :c on line 2 is a class, while :c on line 3 is an
> individual. Morever, :c on line 2 and :c on line 3 have absolutely no
> semantic relationship. They simply have the same name.
> But again, it's not because it's allowed that it is necessarily good.
> 
> Now, if you really *need* to say that :a owl:sameAs :b, then by all
> means do. But remember that this means that :a and :b *is* only one
> individual. If you don't need to assert this identity, maybe it's
> better
> using something like skos:exactMatch.
> 
> If your application does not treat owl:sameAs in any special way (e.g.,
> you use an OWL reasoner, or you display the owl:sameAs link in a
> special
> way) then you really don't need owl:sameAs. If you are doing something
> special for the owl:sameAs predicate, you have to be conscious of the
> implications.
> 
> In any case, there is no problem having a skos:Concept of type
> owl:Thing
> in either OWL DL or OWL Full. A skos:Concept is not necessarily a
> class.
> 
> 
> AZ
> 
> Le 07/03/2012 07:43, Sarven Capadisli a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm sure this is talked somewhere, I'd love a pointer if you know
> any:
> >
> > I often see resources of type owl:Class get paired with resources of
> > type owl:Thing using owl:sameAs. As far as I understand, this is
> > incorrect since domain and range of owl:sameAs should be owl:Thing.
> >
> > I'm tempted to change my resource that is a skos:Concept
> > skos:exactMatch'ed with a resource of type owl:Thing, and use
> > owl:sameAs. Sort of like "everyone else is doing it, it should be
> okay",
> > and "don't need to fear the thought police".
> >
> > However, I don't wish to do that with a clear conscience, hence, I'd
> > appreciate it if anyone can shed some light here for me and help me
> > understand to make an informed decision based on reason (no pun
> intended).
> >
> > Related to this, I was wondering whether it makes sense to claim a
> > resource to be of type owl:Class as well as of type owl:Thing, where
> may
> > be appropriate, or one could get away with it e.g., a country. If
> this
> > is okay, I imagine it is okay to use owl:sameAs for the subject at
> hand
> > and point to yet another thing.
> >
> > Thanks all.
> >
> > -Sarven
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Antoine Zimmermann
> ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol
> École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne
> 158 cours Fauriel
> 42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
> France
> Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 83 36
> Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
> http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
>

Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 15:12:12 UTC