Re: lack of support for claims regarding Concise Bounded Descriptions (see MSGs)

Hi peter, please take a look at our work [1] (this is the most concise) 
which is the base of our P2P algorithm for partial knowledge replication 
([2])
we partly got inspiration from CBD but pushed the formalism and explored 
the properties further, so i believe i might have an explanation for 
what patrik intuits.

CBDs are the union of all the Minimum Self contained Graphs, "involving" 
a starting URI. MSGs can indeed be called "optimal" unders a few point 
of view, I.e. you can transfer a whole graph one MSG at a time and 
rebuild it correctly, you cant do it in any fine granularity or in any 
coarser without duplicating transfers of information (or loosing some). 
Plus some other nice property that make them rather efficent as base for 
context (See the digital singnature stuff we have) .. MSgs are 
guaranteed not to interfere with other MSGs so they can be safely 
inserted and removed, MSGs can be uniquely named leading to a few 
intersting properties (i.e. we're working on efficent syncinc of 
RDFGraphs, results due soon).
we just came out with a small API to demonstrate these concepts  
http://www.dbin.org/RDFContextTools.php

I think it would be nice if Patrick agrees to incldue these theorems 
into his work so we have a unique corpus of "uri centric" "statement 
centric" "msg centric" way of addressing RDF data. Patrick, what do you 
think? :-) SO we can claim "optimal" in a well defined sense

Sincerely
GIovanni

[1] 
http://semedia.deit.univpm.it/submissions/ESWC2005_Poster/ESWC2005_signignRDF.pdf
[2] 
http://giovanni.ea.unian.it/semanticweb/submissions/ISWC2004_workshop_p2p/RDFGROWth_workshopISWC2004.pdf

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

>>From the abstract of http://www.w3.org/Submission/2005/SUBM-CBD-20050603/
>
>	This document [1] defines a concise bounded description of a
>	resource in terms of an RDF graph, as a general and *broadly
>	optimal* [emphasis added] unit of specific knowledge about that
>	resource to be utilized by, and/or interchanged between, semantic
>	web agents.
>
>The other uses of optimal in the document are:
>
>In "Introduction":
>
>	As the semantic web [2] emerges and the behavior of automated
>	software agents becomes increasingly directed by formally defined
>	knowledge about resources [3] gathered from disparate sources [4],
>	the need for optimal and consistent interchange of knowledge about
>	specific resources between agents becomes critical to achieving an
>	efficient, globally scalable, and ubiquitous semantic web.
>
>	This document defines a concise bounded description of a resource
>	in terms of an RDF graph [5], as a general and broadly optimal unit
>	of specific knowledge about that resource to be utilized by, and/or
>	interchanged between, semantic web agents.
>
>	[...]
>
>	Optimality is, of course, application dependent and it is not
>	presumed that a concise bounded description is an optimal form of
>	description for every application; however, it is presented herein
>	as a reasonably general and broadly optimal form of description for
>	many applications, and unless otherwise warranted, constitutes a
>	reasonable default response to the request "tell me about this
>	resource".
>
>In "Alternative Forms of Description":
>
>	As has been mentioned above, it is expected that some applications
>	may find other forms of resource description more optimal than a
>	concise bounded description. The following are some possible
>	alternative forms of description which can be seen as derivations
>	of the basic form of concise bounded description described above,
>	which may be more suitable for particular applications. These
>	alternative forms of description are not, however, considered to be
>	as general or broadly optimal as a concise bounded description.
>
>I thus find nowhere in the document any support for the claim that concise
>bounded descriptions are optimal, broadly or otherwise.
>
>Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>Bell Labs Research
>
>  
>

Received on Sunday, 5 June 2005 15:38:25 UTC