- From: Jim Hendler <jhendler@darpa.mil>
- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:37:44 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Grit Denker <denker@csl.sri.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org, seanl@cs.umd.edu
While I'm not a details guy like Dan, I thought the definition of equivalency was a simple one (i.e. not actually equality) -- I thought we were striving for essentially "macro" like replacement -- i.e. if (equiv XXX YYY) then it should mean replacing XX with YYY leaves meaning unchanged. This may seem silly, but consider it where one ontology has something called "automobile" and another has something called "car" -- I may want some agent to know it can map between these two so I would want to be able to assert that ontology1:autombile is equivalent to ontology2:car. Jeff Heflin and Sean Luke introduced this to the SHOE language, and it was quite useful (and they can correct me if I haven't explained it well) -- Jeff's versioning work (see the SHOE web page) also uses this. -Jim H. Dr. James Hendler jhendler@darpa.mil Chief Scientist, DARPA/ISO 703-696-2238 (phone) 3701 N. Fairfax Dr. 703-696-2201 (Fax) Arlington, VA 22203 http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler
Received on Wednesday, 11 October 2000 09:38:23 UTC