- From: Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:31:33 +0200
- To: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On Oct 26, 2005, at 11:20, Jon Hanna wrote: > Look at it the other way around. If you could assume that there was > a foaf:interest assserted for every foaf:Person then any > foaf:Person without a foaf:interest asserted would be invalid, > hence it would be impossible to say anything about anyone without > giving at least one foaf:interest which you may neither know nor > care about. An application concerned with people's medical history > will not care about the same information as one concerned with > their professional qualifications and so on. Yeah, in OOP you refine the data model to reflect that. I see RDFS and friends are designed in a more decoupled way in that regard because the (ideal) scenario are stores and ontologies all over the net, where a more restricted approach would simply not work. That is not the whole rationale, but I start to understand that context as a key point underlying semantic web technologies. > It *is* possible to say that, for example, all people have mothers In which formalism can you express that? -- fxn
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2005 09:31:46 UTC