- From: Butler, Mark <Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 16:27:29 +0100
- To: "'Alberto Reggiori'" <alberto@asemantics.com>, www-rdf-dspace@w3.org
Hello Alberto Good to hear from you. Yes I think context is very important also and I am also influenced by John Sowa here. So I think we are basically agreeing although I will read through your other references with interest. I do have additional an use case for contexts though which you may be interested in, based on my previous work on CC/PP. In CC/PP requests (normally HTTP) are augmented with CC/PP information about device capabilities and (some) user preferences. So you get a chain of profiles e.g. the factory presets for the device, the user preferences for the device, an intermediate proxy etc each represented by an individual profile. So one of the roles of CC/PP processors is to perform "resolution" i.e. determine when there are multiple values for the same property which is the preferred property. In UAProf, a particular application of CC/PP developed by the OMA (formerly the WAP Forum) they define rules called locked, override or append e.g. select the first value of an attribute, select the last value of an attribute, or append all the attribute values together. When I was implementing CC/PP and UAProf I found it quite hard to implement these resolution rules, at least when performing the merge in a single model, so in the end I just created an RDF model from each profile then read that information into another data structure to perform the merge. However I note this problem could also be solved with contexts e.g. you would place each profile into a different context, and use a query mechanism that supports contexts (which I understand RDFstore does) to perform resolution as part of query. The UAProf standard is well documented, and in addition I have quite a few reports on my implementation on my web page so it might be an interesting experiment to apply your architecture to this problem, although as I am working on SIMILE I'm afraid I can't undertake to do this myself :) > BTW: while at www2003 I had a chat with Matt Biddulph about his RSS > codepiction code/demo and he seems to have similar problems and > solutions using Jena with reification to mimic contextual > information - that means that this aspect is going to fundamental for the > success of the whole Semantic Web and RDF systems to me Yes I agree. I think merging information from multiple sources while retaining context information is a pretty generic use case. Furthermore I'm not as familiar with processing the :log namespace in cwm as other people on this list probably are, but it seems to me that there are use cases where "information destructive" context resolution i.e. you get all the data and resolve it once is undesirable, especially for large problems. We can do the same thing with quads in an information conservative way, although as Andy has pointed out if you do further manipulation to the RDF after merging it you get a problem because if may be harder to label the contexts of different statements. Of course, if you can avoid manipulating e.g. you only add statements, you can get around this. Information destructive versus information conservative processing has been considered by some of theoretical computer science community (e.g. billard ball logic) do you know of any papers that have considered this in relation to the SW and RDF? best regards Dr Mark H. Butler Research Scientist HP Labs Bristol mark-h_butler@hp.com Internet: http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/marbut/
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2003 11:30:51 UTC