W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > September 2005

Re: The semantics of rdfs:label

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 11:36:16 +0100
Message-ID: <432AA020.9070607@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
CC: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net>, public-swbp-wg@w3.org

Sorry to butt into a working group discussion but I'd like to question this.

Any candidate common superproperty of *all* name properties will have to 
apply to both instance data and concepts (classes and properties) and so 
cannot avoid taking you into OWL/full. In which case I see no justification 
for not using rdfs:label for that.

A base naming property which only applies to individuals and so can be 
subPropertied within OWL/DL might be useful but it should itself be a 
subproperty of rdfs:label (even if that fact was kept hidden from DL 

I would have thought that rdfs:label was a perfectly reasonable way to 
represent topic map untyped names, though my knowledge of topic maps is 
weak enough I might be missing something.

We spend a lot of time advising people to use names instead of relying on 
the localname part of URIs. The fact that in RDF there is a single, clear, 
standard, built-in, widely-supported, naming property rdfs:label for naming 
everything makes this much easier. Please could SWBP be very careful not to 
accidently create any confusion about the default naming property to use.


Christopher Welty wrote:

> Lars,
> As I believe you have already concluded, rdfs:label is clearly not the 
> "standard" common superproperty of all name properties.  I think, as you 
> suggested, creating a property specifically for this purpose is the right 
> way to go, and people (like Dan) for whom rdfs:label already is that 
> property can specify the equivalence in their vocabularies, and people 
> (like me) for whom it is not can keep them separate.
> -Chris
> Dr. Christopher A. Welty, Knowledge Structures Group
> IBM Watson Research Center, 19 Skyline Dr., Hawthorne, NY  10532
> Voice: +1 914.784.7055,  IBM T/L: 863.7055, Fax: +1 914.784.7455
> Email: welty@watson.ibm.com
> Web: http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty/
> Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net> 
> Sent by: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
> 09/15/2005 03:27 PM
> To
> public-swbp-wg@w3.org
> cc
> Subject
> Re: The semantics of rdfs:label
> * Christopher Welty
> |
> | I'm not sure there is an official answer to the question.  But I
> | have a lot of experience with it that I can share.
> Your advice seems quite sound to me, but is mostly helpful for people
> creating vocabularies. The RDFTM task force is in a slightly different
> position, however. We have to create a generic mapping between a
> technology that does not have a built-in concept of names (RDF) and
> one that does (Topic Maps). This was why we were wondering if
> rdfs:label is the common superproperty of all name properties. If it
> is, it means that untyped names from Topic Maps can become rdfs:label
> statements in RDF, and vice versa. If not things get a little harder.
Received on Friday, 16 September 2005 10:37:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:12 UTC