- From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:31:27 +0000
- To: "martin.hepp@uibk.ac.at" <martin.hepp@uibk.ac.at>, Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
- CC: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>, Earle Martin <earle@downlode.org>
Regarding use of owl:sameAs . . .
> From: Martin Hepp
> [ . . . ]
> 3. For practical impact, we must (and do so every day outside
> the SW box) adopt stronger statements of equivalence, such
> that may not hold universally, but are appropriate for our
> context of usage and purpose. So we assume things to be more
> similar than they actually are (btw, this is the core
> principle of classification).
+1
To quote from slides 15-18 of
http://dbooth.org/2008/irsw/slides.ppt
(or PDF: http://dbooth.org/2008/irsw/slides.pdf )
[[
owl:sameAs
* Creates value
- Permits data to be merged. Good!
* Also creates problems when combining data
* Contradiction does not mean that the data is wrong!
- Models may be okay for one context, but inadequate for another
- E.g., modeling the earth as flat is good enough for driving directions
* This problem will never go away!
- Avoid it when possible
- But be prepared when it happens
. . .
* Ambiguity is undesirable but unavoidable
- An identity that was good enough for one app may be
insufficiently precise for another
* Pat Hayes the physical body?
* At what point in time?
* Pat Hayes the legal entity?
* Uses of owl:sameAs would be vanishingly few if limited to
cases of identical URI definitions
* owl:sameAs can be viewed as an expression of belief: for
this app/context, these two URIs denote the same resource.
]]
David Booth, Ph.D.
HP Software
+1 617 629 8881 office | dbooth@hp.com
http://www.hp.com/go/software
Statements made herein represent the views of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of HP unless explicitly so stated.
Received on Monday, 7 July 2008 15:32:37 UTC