Re: Rule usage description - or how can I associate related rules to an ontology/RDF graph?

* [2010-12-09 14:36:23 +0100] Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net> écrit:

] As I think the need for assigning specific rules to Semantic Web 
] ontologies/RDF graphs to enable intented inferences is getting more and 
] more important, we need possibilities to semantically related these 
] rules to Semantic Web ontologies/RDF graphs.

Hi Bob, I had some thoughts about this same topic from a parallel
track -- namely how basic statistics about graphs or rdf datasets
(e.g. their size) depend on the rules, and if we want to compare some
size-independent property of two graphs we need to normalise such a
statistic with the size of the graph.

In the context of statistics, the consensus in the void-impl
discussion seems to be that they would hang somewhere in the
definitions of dimensions used in an SDMX dataset.

For what you are describing where the ruleset(s) are intended to be
necessary to interpreting a graph or dataset (i.e. not
dataset-independent) I would imagine that they might live somewhere in
a voiD description of it. Just a thought, not certain this is the
correct approach -- i.e. when is a graph a dataset? How might rules
be inherited in datasets that contain multiple graphs?

Cheers,
-w
-- 
William Waites
http://eris.okfn.org/ww/foaf#i
9C7E F636 52F6 1004 E40A  E565 98E3 BBF3 8320 7664

Received on Thursday, 9 December 2010 13:53:38 UTC