- From: Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@dfki.de>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:40:02 +0100
- To: Peter F Brown <peter@pensive.eu>
- CC: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, KANZAKI Masahide <mkanzaki@gmail.com>, martin.hepp@uibk.ac.at, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <reto@gmuer.ch>, public-sweo-ig@w3.org, semantic-web@w3.org
Hi people, sorry for being late on that. The topics discussed are interesting and relate to the "cool uris for the semantic web" W3C IG note draft, but are not handled by this draft. This is intentionally, because we decided to document only existing solutions proposed by the W3C and not recommend new solutions. We had a proposal to fix this by introducing new properties to RDF in very early drafts, but decided to cut it out for the moment (reasons, see at the end of this mail). for the case of XTM's subjectIdentifcatorRefs and subjectReferences, there is (to my limited knowledge) no equivalence in RDF, SKOS, or the given wikipedia examples. Put bluntly, that one was missed. Nevertheless, the XTM approach is pragmatic and good, and is partly covered by owl:inverseFunctionalProperty and by SKOS:isPrimarySubjectOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-skos-core-spec/#isPrimarySubjectOf) But again, to my knowledge, it is NOT covered in any popular semantic web ontology in the same semantics, and implementation effects that is realized in XTM, where two identical public subject identifiers are an *indicator* for equality. In owl:inverseFunctionalProperty, they are no indicator but a *fact* that both are the same, with skos:isPrimarySubjectOf, no hint is given that implementations must/should merge resources when having the same PSI (hence, not even an *indicator*). I myself have published a vocabulary for that inspired by XTM, OWL, and SKOS to solve this problem, but to my knowledge, only scientists have used it so far, see below in my answer to danny's statement for more It was Martin Hepp (UIBK) who said at the right time 17.01.2008 17:31 the following words: > > To me, the cleanest approach of reusing the huge set of consensual > identifiers for non-information resources that Wikipedia URIs are > would be > to import them into a clean new namespace and link back from those to > the original Wikipedia URIs via rdfs:seeAlso. that was done by dbpedia.org please look it up, learn about it, it is probably the well-used implementation fo your proposal. No need to work on this, the solution proposed by DBPedia works and has been in heavy use already, its a kind of "best practice". It was Danny Ayers who said at the right time 17.01.2008 17:59 the following words: > Whether or not that is the case, I don't see why the use/mention > distinction can't appear in RDF directly, e.g. : > > <uri> a :Use . > or > <uri> a :Mention . > > (I think I've seen a vocab around somewhere that includes a class > InformationResource...) > Maybe you refer to the vocabulary we created inside a project, the NEPOMUK Information Element Ontology (NIE) that models RDF resources in comparison to elements in a "proper" ontology, normal information elements are "dirty old websites, files and e-mails" whereas "Things" are then arcane elements in an ontology. On top of NIE, the Personal Information Model (PIMO) ontology introduces pimo:referencingOccurrence relation, which has the same semantics as XTM's public subject identifiers. I have created this property out of my humble view that RDF misses this point (or my misunderstanding of SKOS/OWL), which is also the observation that you had. there is a paper on PIMO and a vocabulary description draft with some explanations on that, but for you guys following the discussion and knowing about XTM, you probably know what I mean when I just say pimo:referencingOccurrence NIE: http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/2007/01/19/nie PIMO: http://dev.nepomuk.semanticdesktop.org/wiki/PimoOntology DRAFT report on pimo: http://dev.nepomuk.semanticdesktop.org/repos/trunk/ontologies/pimo/latex/pimo.pdf the rdf is a bit broken at the moment (I broke apache's redirects), its retrievable here: http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/2007/11/01/pimo.rdfs It was Peter F Brown who said at the right time 17.01.2008 19:05 the following words: > <quote> > Whether or not that is the case, I don't see why the use/mention > distinction can't appear in RDF directly, e.g. : > > <uri> a :Use . > or > <uri> a :Mention . > > (I think I've seen a vocab around somewhere that includes a class > InformationResource...) > > </quote> > > Agreed. > In turn these would correspond to <resourceRef> and <subjectIndicatorRef> in the XTM standard... > > Regards, > > Peter as said above, I contributed an ontology for these things, PIMO, but thats not comparable to a W3C standard on the level of RDF. actually, the problem needs to be solved on the level of RDF/RDFS/OWL, or maybe SKOS. btw, there is another problem attached to 303-uris: we have no clear rdf:Property linking the uri of a web-document to the non-information resource describing the concept in the document. What we achieve with 303 uris is a redirect on the level of HTTP-protocol that is interpreted as a semantics of "oh, its a 303 and no 400, so it can't really be a web-document", but this semantics also needs a property in rdf/rdfs. anyway, all this is not described (intentionally) in the "cool uris for the semantic web" document, because we are aware of these problems but are also aware that it must be discussed, proposed, agreed, and recommended in a future W3C process (taking some months/years) and not before tomorrow/today, when the deadline for the "cool uris" document ends, first things first. best Leo -- ____________________________________________________ DI Leo Sauermann http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz DFKI GmbH Trippstadter Strasse 122 P.O. Box 2080 Fon: +49 631 20575-116 D-67663 Kaiserslautern Fax: +49 631 20575-102 Germany Mail: leo.sauermann@dfki.de Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof.Dr.Dr.h.c.mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender) Dr. Walter Olthoff Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313 ____________________________________________________
Received on Sunday, 20 January 2008 23:41:46 UTC