- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 15:10:58 +0200
- Cc: Semantic Web Interest Group <semantic-web@w3.org>
Salut Yves Yves Raimond a écrit : > Hello! > > >> 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. >> > > Sorry to jump in the middle of this discussion, but I don't > particularly agree with that. They are plenty of cases where they > can't really be avoided, even in LOD large projects. > For example, http://dbtune.org/jamendo/artist/5 and > http://zitgist.com/music/artist/0781a3f3-645c-45d1-a84f-76b4e4decf6d > identify the same artist. One of them in the Jamendo database, and one > of them in Musicbrainz. > See my previous message. It all depends on what you mean by "the same artist" ... > Both databases hold *really* different type of information about these > artists. Musicbrainz holds detailed editorial information (regardless > of their publication in the Jamendo Creative Commons platform), > information about the members of this band and their birth dates, etc. > Jamendo holds actual audio items, and also a set of tags for each of them. > In this case, maybe you have the chance to have completely orthogonal descriptions, IOW different "facets". Unclear > As an URI is not only an identifier but also a way to access a > specific representation, how could I use a single URI in this case? In > other words, how would I avoid the owl:sameAs between the two? > This is the core issue. From a purely declarative viewpoint, owl:sameAs entails that representations are merged and you can't separate any more what is coming from where. It's a semantic equivalent of thermodynamics 2nd principle. I'm not sure that "a URI is not only an identifier but also a way to access a specific representation" is an affirmation which holds in a linked data universe. > Different data sources make different claims about similar thing, and > we need both a way to access these claims and to keep the cross-source > identity. I think owl:sameAs is quite a nice way of doing that. > You are no more native speaker than I am :) But you seem to use "same" and "similar" indifferently. My point is that "same" and "similar" are similar, but not the same. Bernard -- *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 Thursday, 15 May 2008 13:11:45 UTC