- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 10:57:26 +0200
- To: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>
- Cc: <semantic-web@w3.org>, "Dave Beckett" <dave@dajobe.org>, "Story Henry" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
TimBL wrote: >On 2007-10 -03, at 06:55, Story Henry wrote: > >> >> On 3 Oct 2007, at 12:41, Michael Schneider wrote: >> >>> Henry Story wrote: >>> >>>> What about = >>>> >>>> That would be a nice addition. :-) >>>> >>>> Especially as it allows one to group statements together like this: >>>> >>>> :me foaf:knows [ = <http://eg.com/joe/>; >>>> foaf:name "Joe Smith" ] . >>>> >>> >>> Just for me to understand: Is this meant to be a shortcut for >>> 'owl:sameAs'? >> >> Yep! It's that obvious :-) >> > >Yes. It is only allows as a predicate, you can't say = s:label >"same as". >I agree it is very useful. Me too. But doesn't anyone feel inconvenient with the idea of making Turtle dependent on OWL vocabulary? I thought that Turtle has been intended to be a pure RDF serialization? Ok, one could say that 'owl:sameAs' is just some URI, which happens to share its namespace prefix with that of OWL... would be an opinion. Now while I think about this: Why is there no 'rdf:sameAs' in RDF? Equality is such a fundamental concept. And RDF does not have a unique name assumption, so a 'sameAs' property in RDF would have a real benefit, because it would allow me to explicit state that two different URIs are intended to denote the same resource. I have often seen people in this mailing list using or referring to 'owl:sameAs' for expressing equality in "pure" RDF (non-OWL) related discussions. But what did these people do before OWL? Ah, perhaps they applied the analog DAML [1] concept? But when I look at this old ontology language, there was a clear distinction between sameness for individuals, classes and properties. Such a separation would probably not be perfectly appropriate for RDF. So has it been anticipated that there will, in the future, be some general equality concept in one of the more expressive ontology languages? Otherwise it would look to me as if we had a little "luck" that such a concept was finally introduced in OWL, many years after RDF had been standardized. Of course, if there really was an 'rdf:sameAs' in RDF, one would than also have to think about supporting 'sameAs' in RDF-S, too, as a reasoning feature (not necessarily of course, I know). And this might have led to some difficulties. So 'sameAs' might really have been /intentionaly/ left out of RDF in favour of an analog OWL concept in the future. Any SemWeb historian here, who can explain this to me? Well, just a few weakly connected thoughts, which came to my mind, when thinking about "=" in Turtle. :) Cheers, Michael [1] DAML ontology language: http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de Web : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555 FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
Received on Friday, 5 October 2007 08:57:51 UTC