- From: John Goodwin <John.Goodwin@ordnancesurvey.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:09:31 -0000
- To: "Jens Lehmann" <lehmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Cc: <dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>, <semantic-web@w3.org>, <public-lod@w3.org>
> Regarding you arguments: > > Too tight restrictions: Which ones specifically are too > tight? If the restrictions cause inconsistencies (which they > are likely to do at the moment), then this is a signal a > problem in the DBpedia data. (Which is one of the purposes of > imposing restrictions.) I've noticed that properties like "father" have a domain of "British Royal or Monarch" and I wonder if this is too tight. Would you not save yourself headaches in the future by relaxing that restriction to Person? For example if you want to add in "father" information for US presidents will you then have to go back and edit your OWL ontology to include US presidents in the domain of "father". Furthermore, I understand disjunctions can be expensive when reasoning (not sure if that would be the case in the Dbpedia ontology as it doesn't use that much extra OWL). > I think there are many of those. First of all, they allow > checking consistency in the DBpedia data. Having consistent > data allows to provide nice user interfaces for DBpedia. I'm still not sure how domain and range will help check consistency. Don't you need OWL disjoints and other information to find inconsistencies, unless of course you check all the inferred types for the instances? > As a consequence, OWL should never be used for consistency checking? You can use it for checking satifiability of classes and consistency of ontologies if you add enough information, but otherwise ontologies will generally just add more information that lead to extra entailments. John . This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice. Thank you for your cooperation. Ordnance Survey Romsey Road Southampton SO16 4GU Tel: 08456 050505 http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2008 09:19:02 UTC