Re: owl:sameAs - Is it used in a right way?

I did not find this a rookie question at all.

This seems to get to the heart of some of the real difficult issues in Semantic Web.

My perspective is different from yours, and a resource description that I author is a description of the resource from my perspective; a resource description that you author is a description from your perspective.

If I have some detailed application that depends in some subtle way on my description, I may want to ignore your version; on the other hand, a third party might want to use both of our points of view.

One way of tacking this problem is to have three graphs for this case:

Gj, Gu, G=

Gj contains triples describing my point of view
Gu contains triples describing your point of view
G= contains the owl:sameAs triples

Then, in some application contexts, we use Gj, sometimes Gu, and sometimes all three.

Jeremy




On Mar 15, 2013, at 11:02 AM, Umutcan ŞİMŞEK <s.umutcan@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the quick answer : )
> 
> So this issue is that subjective for contexts which allows to use owl:sameAs to link resources  if they are not semantically even a little bit related in real world?
> 
> Sorry if I'm asking too basic questions. I'm still a rookie at this :D
> 
> Umutcan
> 
> 
> On 15-03-2013 19:38, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 3/15/13 1:05 PM, Umutcan ŞİMŞEK wrote:
>>> My question is, does LODD use owl:sameAs properly? For instance, are those two resources, dbpedia:Metamizole and drugbank:DB04817 (code for Metamizole), really identical? Or am I getting the word "property" in the paper wrong?
>> The question is always about: do those URIs denote the same thing? Put differently, do the two URIs have a common referent?
>> 
>> ## Turtle ##
>> 
>> <#i> owl:sameAs <#you>.
>> 
>> ## End ##
>> 
>> That's a relation in the form of a 3-tuple based statement that carries entailment consequences for a reasoner that understand the relation semantics. Through some "context lenses" the statement above could be accurate, in others totally inaccurate.
>> 
>> Conclusion, beauty lies eternally in the eyes of the beholder :-)
>> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 15 March 2013 18:29:36 UTC