- From: Sean Bechhofer <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:52:04 +0100
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: Alistair Miles <alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk>, public-swd-wg@w3.org
On 22 Oct 2008, at 20:04, Antoine Isaac wrote: > > +1 for the first part. Disjointness of properties seems for the > moment a bit difficult to state, given the meagre amount of > expertise in that domain. Actually for some experiments we have > thought about that, and came with no definitive conclusion. It > depends on what you want to do with the mappings, it seems. Some > cases would accomodate very well non-disjoint properties, some will > actually exploit the disjointess to make inferences wrt. to the > quality of an alignment. > > For the second part, I do not really understand the comment. Where > have we stated that the semantic relationships are of secondary > importance? I mean, having a significant part of our vocabulary > (and our documents) about them acknowledges the relevance of these, > doesn't it? And with respect to the use of semantic relationships I > think the UCR documents provides enough evidence of how important > they are for the scope of SKOS... I think that's more or less what Alistair is saying here isn't it? Sean -- Sean Bechhofer School of Computer Science University of Manchester sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
Received on Friday, 24 October 2008 09:53:22 UTC