- From: Chris Mungall <cjmungall@lbl.gov>
- Date: Sat, 25 May 2019 13:57:51 -0700
- To: Owl Dev <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAN9Aifvupv-3aSFOXGxHnj=sKhYtV4fczkQd2mm6Hb9a5nwTLg@mail.gmail.com>
RDF* provides a way of unifying RDF and Property Graphs (neo4j, "knowledge graphs", etc): http://blog.liu.se/olafhartig/2019/01/10/position-statement-rdf-star-and-sparql-star/ In my experience everyone ends up with similar patterns for storing TBox axiom patterns like SubClassOf-SomeValuesFrom as single edges in PGs, and often as single triples in triplestores (e.g. Wikidata treatment of TBoxes). There's an obvious way to better formalize this, where the edge properties determine the OWL interpretation. In RDF* this could be written something like: <<:nucleus :part-of :cell>> owlstar:hasInterpretation owlstar:SubClassOfSomeValuesFrom . <<:hand :has-part :finger>> owlstar:hasInterpretation owlstar:SubClassOfQCR ; owlstar:hasCardinality 5 . Hopefully this gives the general idea, which should be fairly obvious. Are there any attempts to coalesce either a standard or at least a core vocabulary for this? Would this be the right mailing list for organizing this? Or is this already happening somewhere else? This could be part of a larger effort to support a range of different semantics for RDF* and PGs. E.g. probabilistic <<:RhinovirusInfection :has-symptom :RunnyNose>> probstar:hasProbability 0.75 . Or contextual, a la IKL <<:clark_kent owl:sameAs :superman>> a ikl:that ; :believed-by :lois_lane . There are challenges in terms of layering this with existing mappings to OWL but there are some pragmatic approaches for dealing with these.
Received on Saturday, 25 May 2019 20:58:33 UTC