Re: How do you deprecate URIs? Re: OWL-DL and linked data

Hi Giovanni

Interesting view - not answering the initial question, though - except 
to confirm that OWL does not provide any out-of-the-box answer ... which 
is no news. :-) .
That said, having a non-symmetrical interpretation of 'owl:sameAs' is a 
bit of a hack. Default more accurate vocabulary, owl:sameAs is used for 
about any kind of "referent similarity" (we've discussed that at length 
many times in this and other forums). In the case you explain the 
property to use (and which is indeed lacking in the standard vocabulary) 
should be something like ":compatibleWith" ...

a:foo      :compatibleWith      b:bar

... meaning that if you can add elements of description of :bar to those 
of :foo. Which is not necessarily symmetrical. For example DBpedia has 
indeed one "Berlin" whereas Geonames has two (the administrative 
subdivision and the populated place). So we could write.

<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Berlin>	:compatibleWith	 <http://sws.geonames.org/2950159/>
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Berlin>	:compatibleWith	 <http://sws.geonames.org/2950157/>

Actually what we need is a namespace and vocabulary for all those 
flavors of URI similarity and equivalence to be used on the Web, 
diffferent from OWL and RDFS namespace.

Bernard

Giovanni Tummarello a écrit :
>> "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
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.0.135 / Virus Database: 270.4.4/1532 - Release Date: 03/07/2008 08:32
>
>
>
>   

-- 

*Bernard Vatant
*Knowledge Engineering
----------------------------------------------------
*Mondeca**
*3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France
Web:    www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com>
----------------------------------------------------
Tel:       +33 (0) 971 488 459
Mail:     bernard.vatant@mondeca.com <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
Blog:    Leçons de Choses <http://mondeca.wordpress.com/>

Received on Friday, 4 July 2008 08:18:38 UTC