- From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:27:27 -0800
- To: Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>
- Cc: Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>, Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>, Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <dc15e49c-8742-d0e7-c35c-0f7a60b6f1d9@ucsb.edu>
Yes, but note that the idea of /encapsulation/ does not exist in RDF, OWL, and so forth. On 02/28/2017 11:25 AM, Joshua Lieberman wrote: > My mistake. The term I intended was “Overriding” which is a local > re-implementation of an existing method + signature. Generally the > intent is to provide similar behavior but in a different execution > context. > > Josh > >> On Feb 28, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu >> <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>> wrote: >> >> On 02/28/2017 11:06 AM, Joshua Lieberman wrote: >>> “Overloading” ? >> >> I am a bit more concerned about SOSA, SSN, SSN-OLD, SSN+DUL, and so >> forth all creating different results when performing reasoning (or >> even just simple SPARQL queries). IMHO, we need to be as clear as >> possible about what to expect when using these classes and enable >> users to clearly distinguish between them. If I see a triple and I >> have no way of immediately knowing what it implies, that would be >> very concerning to me (but maybe not to others, or maybe I am simply >> missing something). This is also true for overloading in programming >> languages, the method's signature tells you what has changed. >> >> Best, >> Jano >> >> >>> >>>> On Feb 28, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu >>>> <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 02/25/2017 09:36 PM, Armin Haller wrote: >>>>> I agree that hijacking conveys a negative meaning. Raphaël already >>>>> mentioned earlier that he does not want to convey that negative >>>>> meaning, so your renaming to “precises” is good. >>>> >>>> Yes, but this depends a bit on what more we add, especially if this >>>> would include existential quantifications. >>>> >>>> Jano >>>> >>>> >>>>> We could make Option 2b/3c just Option 5. I will wait for Rob’s >>>>> response, but as it looks to Simon and me, these two options are >>>>> the same. >>>>> *From:*Maxime Lefrançois<maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr> >>>>> *Date:*Saturday, 25 February 2017 at 12:30 am >>>>> *To:*Rob Atkinson<rob@metalinkage.com.au>, Armin >>>>> Haller<armin.haller@anu.edu.au>, Raphaël >>>>> Troncy<raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>,"public-sdw-wg@w3.org"<public-sdw-wg@w3.org> >>>>> *Subject:*Re: SOSA/SSN integration architecture >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> I checked the options 2 to 4 and corrected some inconsistencies >>>>> with respect to the URIs of the ontologies. : >>>>> - the URI of the SOSA ontology is once >>>>> writtenhttp://www.w3.org/ns/sosa/, and once >>>>> written unify:localname. From this one can infer that ''unify'' >>>>> equals "sosa", and ''localname'' equals the empty string. >>>>> - the URI of the SSN ontology is also written unify:localname, so >>>>> it has the same URI as the SOSA ontology. >>>>> The object of the rdfs:isDefinedBy is often the ontology where the >>>>> term is defined, not the namespace. >>>>> I updated the snippets to reflect this. Please tell me if you >>>>> think otherwise. >>>>> I believe term "hijacking" is not well chosen here. It's conveys a >>>>> negative meaning, and does not reflect what is actually happening: >>>>> SSN "refines", or "precises" the semantics of some SOSA terms. I >>>>> changed hijacking to "precises". >>>>> In option 2b/3c, SOSA and SSN are not in the same namespace, >>>>> hence I hardly see why it would be considered as a variant of >>>>> option 2. >>>>> I just added some spaces in option 5 to correct the "code" sections. >>>>> Kind regards, >>>>> Maxime >>>>> Le ven. 24 févr. 2017 à 09:03, Rob Atkinson >>>>> <rob@metalinkage.com.au> a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> And the mime type handling is a corner case that only applies >>>>> to the case of clients who want owl and gind resources that >>>>> dont use explicit imports - ir instead choose to rely on >>>>> namespace only (if indeed such clients exist) >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2017, 6:36 PM Rob Atkinson >>>>> <rob@metalinkage.com.au> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> No the difference is no neec to subclass sosa terms to ssn >>>>> equivalents. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps this makes no difference after owl entailment but >>>>> it makes a big difference in that ssn instances are not >>>>> sosa instances without extra reasoning. >>>>> >>>>> Rob >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2017, 4:23 PM Armin Haller >>>>> <armin.haller@anu.edu.au> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Now that you have described your option, I don’t see >>>>> any difference to Option 3b which itself is a slight >>>>> variant of Option 2 (reusing of terms ONLY rather than >>>>> reintroducing terms within the new namespace). >>>>> You define terms in SOSA. >>>>> In SSN you import these terms and add axioms. >>>>> If the term has not been introduced in SOSA, you >>>>> define it in the new module-specific namespace (SSN). >>>>> If I interpret this correctly, it is exactly Option 3b >>>>> with the addition of the mechanism of handling MIME types. >>>>> *From:*Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au> >>>>> *Date:*Friday, 24 February 2017 at 1:58 pm >>>>> *To:*Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, Armin >>>>> Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>, Maxime Lefrançois >>>>> <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>, Raphaël Troncy >>>>> <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org >>>>> <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org >>>>> <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>> >>>>> >>>>> *Subject:*Re: SOSA/SSN integration architecture >>>>> Have added option 5 and some clarifications to issue >>>>> scope (i.e. what does extended mean) >>>>> Rob >>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 at 13:13 Rob Atkinson >>>>> <rob@metalinkage.com.au> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> IMHO My proposal is not an implementation of >>>>> option 1, because new terms in SSN are added to a >>>>> new namespace, and only axioms 100% compatible to >>>>> SOSA are allowed in SSN against SOSA defined terms. >>>>> Option 1 seems to be explicitly about the opposite >>>>> strategy: new terms in SSN in the SOSA namespace >>>>> and heroics in the infrastructure to manage >>>>> finding these. >>>>> I'm convinced its different, and simpler than the >>>>> existing options and will add it - we can always >>>>> remove it if people can prove one of the other >>>>> cases is equivalent, >>>>> Rob >>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 at 10:38 Armin Haller >>>>> <armin.haller@anu.edu.au> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> I have removed the **bold** in the implication >>>>> of Option 1. I do want to keep the >>>>> implications neutral. Some people may care a >>>>> lot about that specific implication, some >>>>> others not. >>>>> I also deleted the statement “always the case >>>>> with slash-based URIs” with the “One needs to >>>>> dereference a term to figure out where this >>>>> term is defined”. Raphaël added the yesterday >>>>> as an implication. The commonly expected >>>>> behaviour/expectation with Ontology Slash URIs >>>>> on the Linked Data Web is that the ontology >>>>> sits at the directory level of that term. I >>>>> think it is a valid point to make in this >>>>> option that the behaviour here and in Option 2 >>>>> would be different. Again, some people may >>>>> care about that, some others not. >>>>> *From:*Maxime Lefrançois >>>>> <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr> >>>>> *Date:*Friday, 24 February 2017 at 6:09 am >>>>> *To:*Raphaël Troncy >>>>> <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>, Armin Haller >>>>> <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>, >>>>> "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org> >>>>> >>>>> *Subject:*Re: SOSA/SSN integration architecture >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> I updated option 1, and highlighted its >>>>> multiple variants, >>>>> I would like to highlight variant sosa1, for >>>>> which looking up the unified namespace leads >>>>> to the SOSA ontology. >>>>> Kind regards, >>>>> Maxime >>>>> Le jeu. 23 févr. 2017 à 12:12, Raphaël Troncy >>>>> <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr> a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> >➢Done, changed it on the Wiki. I think >>>>> that makes it clearer. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> >➢You can use the ontology URI to figure >>>>> out which terms are in the core (SOSA). It >>>>> is the same behaviour as in Option 1. In >>>>> Option 1 you also either need to >>>>> dereference each term to figure out where >>>>> it is defined or to use the ontology URI >>>>> of SOSA or SSN explicitly. If you think >>>>> this is an important caveat, you can spell >>>>> that out in the implication for both options. >>>>> >>>>> I agree, this is true for both options 1 >>>>> and 2. Done, I have added for >>>>> each: "* One needs to dereference a term >>>>> to figure out where this term >>>>> is defined OR to use the ontology URI of >>>>> SOSA or SSN explicitly since >>>>> there is just ONE unify namespace." >>>>> >>>>> Note: Option 3b is still Option 3b and not >>>>> a variant of Option 1 >>>>> although it could be. >>>>> >>>>> Raphaël >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Raphaël Troncy >>>>> EURECOM, Campus SophiaTech >>>>> Data Science Department >>>>> 450 route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, France. >>>>> e-mail:raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr&raphael.troncy@gmail.com >>>>> Tel:+33 (0)4 - 9300 8242 >>>>> <tel:04%2093%2000%2082%2042> >>>>> Fax:+33 (0)4 - 9000 8200 >>>>> <tel:04%2090%2000%2082%2000> >>>>> Web:http://www.eurecom.fr/~troncy/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Krzysztof Janowicz >>>> >>>> Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara >>>> 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 >>>> >>>> Email:jano@geog.ucsb.edu >>>> Webpage:http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ >>>> Semantic Web Journal:http://www.semantic-web-journal.net >>> >> >> >> -- >> Krzysztof Janowicz >> >> Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara >> 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 >> >> Email:jano@geog.ucsb.edu >> Webpage:http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ >> Semantic Web Journal:http://www.semantic-web-journal.net > -- Krzysztof Janowicz Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2017 19:34:15 UTC