On 24 Mar 2011, at 23:10, Dieter Fensel wrote: > At 22:30 24.03.2011, Enrico Franconi wrote: >> I believe that there is a major misunderstanding by the non-logicians about bnodes, existential variables, and skolem constants. > > Thanks for classifying me properly. :-) > Well, URIs or the work of OCCAM in Trento work precisely on this type of stuff. For example, getting unique or universal identifiers in the Internet of Things area (*) is an active area of research at the moment. Much more interesting than discussing again and again about the hair cut of Aristotle. Thanks for describing my hairs properly. > And even if some solutions will brake occasionally this is as relevant as a broken link on the web. How many "wrong" same-as statements are on LOD because OWL cannot incorporate the perspective of an observer in its primitive notion of equality? So you are proposing to guarantee the unicity of ANY bnode by a central universal identifier. I don't believe that you can really disambiguate any possible referent in the world, but my opinion is irrelevant here. What is relevant is that by saying so you are proposing anyway to consider bnodes as standard constants, and therefore this would be dropping them completely. Fair enough. The problem of dealing with ambiguity in this basic ground relational language remains though, Occam or non Occam. > Instead of receiving free lectures on logics by University professors I would prefer to free people to focus on rocket engineering. Thanks for classifying me properly. Building engineering without static and dynamic analysis would not lead to stable houses. --e.
Received on Thursday, 24 March 2011 22:21:58 UTC