- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 17:40:36 -0500
- To: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cs.umd.edu>
- CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Jeff Heflin wrote: > > Hi all, > > As the main spokesperson for SHOE I though I'd comment on Dan's post. Thanks! I hope to respond in substance eventually; just a few quick points for now... [...] > Second, SHOE use-ontology statements are similar to the way RDF use > namespaces to identify schemas. I say similar and not equivalent because > a use-ontology says that I specifically agree only to the semantics > implied by this ontology and those ontologies which it extends. It's not > clear that RDF Schema has such a feature. For example if you have a > schema http://schema.org/web which defines the class Web_Developer, what > does it mean when someone else creates another schema (say > http://hacker.org/hah) that includes the following RDF: > > <rdfs:Class rdf:about="http://schema.org/web#Web_Developer"> > <rdfs:subclassOf rdf:resource="#Silly_Person"> > </rdfs:Class> > > I do not see any restrictions in the RDFS spec to prevent such a > statement. Why should we prevent such a statement? Anyone can say anything about anything, no? cf Saying anything about anything: Comments on Harle & Fensel Tim Berners-Lee (Tue, Dec 21 1999) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/1999Dec/0113.html > Also, as I understand it way namespaces are used in RDF is > only to uniquely identify what object you're talking about, not which > sets of definitions you subscribe to. Thus, if I state that I am > Web_Developer, then do I also imply that I am a Silly_Person? If you say P and P->Q, then you imply Q, yes. But if you say P and somebody else says P->Q, then a third party may or may not decide to trust you both enough to conclude Q. > Note that > in SHOE, you cannot state that a class defined elsewhere is the subclass > of another class, and even if you could, the semantics for reasoning > about web pages are those that the web page explicitly commits to. As an > aside, we have worked out a formal model that deals with intended > perspectives (what the author explictly believes can be reasoned from > his web page) and alternate perspectives (what the user wants to > conclude from a web page). These issues are discussed in a paper that > will appear in the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial > Intelligence (AAAI-2000). The paper is available online from > http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/plus/SHOE/pubs/#aaai2000. Thanks for the reference... oh for more time to read all the nifty stuff around here! > BTW: Dan, some of the links on your SHOE to RDF page appear to be > broken, or at least not available to the public. In particular the tidy > configuration, RDF output, and xhtmlized PLUS page. Oops... sorry... hmm... I'm having trouble fixing that. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 12 May 2000 18:40:17 UTC