W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > November 2005

Re: Why Literals should be unique and why this is a serious issue

From: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:32:48 -0800
Message-Id: <12AB4251-B385-4F2F-B37C-08F57F97848B@reading.ac.uk>
Cc: semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>
To: Andreas Andreakis <andreas.andreakis@gmx.de>

Let's have a counter-example.

I know two people named David Green. Almost no literal-valued  
property can really be termed inverse-functional: even genetic code  
sequences can be shared (between twins, for example). Certainly,  
terming names ("Tiger Woods") as IFPs (your more "fundamental  
problem") doesn't work.

> So, in a relational Database this problem would have never arrised.  
> So why canīt be do the same in Ontologies ?

Well, as has been pointed out, we can -- IFPs. We don't do so very  
often because our assertions have global scope, and I *know* that the  
two David Greens are separate individuals.

Relational databases rarely choose to deal with the possibilities of  
integrating data from a dozen sources.

Received on Saturday, 19 November 2005 09:33:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:40:57 UTC