- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 12:21:59 +0000
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
On 22/11/2018 00:38, Holger Knublauch wrote: > Would you mind clarifying this statement a bit? What practical benefits would > the foundation on formal logic add to a future (simplified) RDF, for average > users? I have seen plenty of evidence that some aspects of the semantic > technology stack are being regarded as too academic, and that the role of formal > logic has been one driver of this detachment. Related topics are the > non-unique-name-assumption and the open world assumption that are typically > neither understood nor expected by average users. Jumping in, if I may... My view is that the formal logic underpinning of RDF serves (at least) one important (and not-so-academic) purpose: Given two distinct RDF graphs that are taken to be descriptions of some world or context, following the procedure of RDF graph merging guarantees that the resulting graph is true of that world exactly when the individual graphs are true of that world. To my mind, this underpins the (open-world?) idea of being able to meaningfully combine RDF information from independent sources. (Without implying any guarantee of absolute truth, whatever that may be.) #g --
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2018 12:22:25 UTC