- From: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@cnr.it>
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 14:17:58 +0200
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@cnr.it>, "Michael F Uschold" <uschold@gmail.com>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Sören Auer <auer@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, Semantic Web Interest Group <semantic-web@w3.org>, Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de>, Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "Fabian M. Suchanek" <f.m.suchanek@gmail.com>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@csail.mit.edu>, Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>, Mark Greaves <markg@vulcan.com>, georgi.kobilarov@gmx.de, Jens Lehmann <lehmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, Frederick Giasson <fred@fgiasson.com>, Michael Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>, Conor Shankey <cshankey@reinvent.com>, Kira Oujonkova <koujonkova@reinvent.com>
Hi Richard, sorry for any misquotation, I wanted to describe the issue, not to criticize other opinions out of context. See comments below Il giorno 15/mag/08, alle ore 12:20, Richard Cyganiak ha scritto: > Aldo, > > Please keep your facts straight. > > On 14 May 2008, at 22:24, Aldo Gangemi wrote: >> owl:sameAs is great to co-reference persons, places, etc. It is >> buggy when used to relate e.g. foaf:Person >> instances to persons' homepages, > > I would like to point out that I haven't come across any instance > where this has been done or encouraged. > I have not said that, but that none has "discouraged" >> or a city as from Cyc to a wikipedia article of that city (as done >> in DBpedia). > > DBpedia doesn't contain any owl:sameAs statements between Cyc > resources and Wikipedia articles. > See the extended datasets (http://wiki.dbpedia.org/Downloads) for "Links to Cyc" at: http://downloads.dbpedia.org/preview.php?file=3.0_sl_en_sl_links_cyc_en.nt.bz2 > [snip] >> It is reasonable, as Richard Cyganiak wrote at the time, that we >> have to work around the quirks [2], nonetheless, if there is no >> real need, why should we work around the quirks caused by a >> pointless identity assumption? > > I feel misquoted. In the original discussion [1], I encouraged the > use of owl:sameAs between three different definitions (Geonames, > GEMET and DBpedia) of the concept of a “canal”. I did *not* advocate > to gloss over the difference between a thing and a document about > that thing, as you imply by your examples above. To the contrary, I > have insisted on this difference many times, e.g. in [2]. That's ok. I used an indirect quotation of yours from Bernard Vatant's blog. Talking of content, on the sameness of Geonames and DBpedia articles I have anyway a different intuition: Geonames refer to geographical locations, DBpedia entries to articles, which on their turn can refer to geographic locations > > > At the end of the day, we have to keep in mind that we are talking > about the Web. Statements will be subjective, inconsistent and > wrong. This also applies to owl:sameAs statements. They are claims, > not facts. Deal with it. Agreed. I do not want to be picky about that: SW is Web, and errors are life. Just there is no need to use owl:sameAs in many cases, and at least in LOD large projects, this can be avoided easily. Thanks for clarifying Aldo _________________________________ Aldo Gangemi Senior Researcher Laboratory for Applied Ontology Institute for Cognitive Sciences and Technology National Research Council (ISTC-CNR) Via Nomentana 56, 00161, Roma, Italy Tel: +390644161535 Fax: +390644161513 aldo.gangemi@cnr.it http://www.loa-cnr.it/gangemi.html icq# 108370336 skype aldogangemi
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 12:18:23 UTC