- From: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 00:34:13 +0100
- To: "Jonathan Rees" <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Cc: "Bernard Vatant" <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, "semantic-web at W3C" <semantic-web@w3c.org>, "Earle Martin" <earle@downlode.org>
> "http:..." or something equivalent, not a reference <http:...>, since in the > latter case you're talking about what the URI names, not the URI itself, and > things can have more than one name - some of which might be deprecated, and Some thoughs: Pragmatically speaking if there is one thing that "linked data" buys us is new URIs for the same thing others might be talking about, but specifically minted within "one's context", that is the name space of the site who's hosting the RDF so http://dbpedia.org/resource/Berlin is really not "berlin" in general but obviously "something that they have in their DB that has label "berlin" and bla bla then there is http://geonames/123456 that might also be berlin. If there is an agreement by the dbpedia guys that that entity is equivalent for DBPEDIA PURPOSES to their entities then the dbpedia people put a "sameAs" between the two. So "sameAs" on the web of linked data is always a "directed sameAs" This pragmatic interpretation should be "we people at dbpedia believe that it might be useful for you as a robot to also go collect information from this other source as we find it generally compatible with the information we provide here" given this interpretation of "linked data URIs" (something i previously called URI/URLs and i still dont find a better term for it) then i believe its perfectly valid to state things about the URI itself, since they always must be interpreted within the context where they were taken. i know, OWL doesnt account for this, that is, it will not make distinctions between "context only valid statements" and not.. but i see no alternative to deal with this at preprocessing level, e.g. when you crawler picks up linked data information, you should look for said context onyl valid statments before you smush all together with the sameAs Giovanni
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2008 23:34:54 UTC