- From: Didier <didier@phpapp.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 02:56:53 +0200
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Hi, This my first post with this new adress. I'm in the process to leave my current job to find a new paradise (i hope in the sw domain) so i should not post with it anymore. So i subscribed with my own @ from the free-software project I belong to. I posted before many mails as dvillevalois@sqli.com. I would like to react to some discussions that occured on the WebOnt working group mailing list. It seems to be closed to AC reps, so i expect that no people from OSS and freesoft projects will ever participate (what i think is really a shame as W3 is to be a consortium but that is not the problem for now) Jonathan Borden proposed a solution to layer somthing like OWL on RDF with unaserted triples. The problem is always the same: what we do introduce as new stuff in the semweb is 'context is different for everybody'. This stands also for wondering what semantic level (thinking of layering) a statement refers to (or its property refers to). This also is similar to context as introduced in N3. You do need a solution to express what semantic context a statement belongs to ? I think that the triple:model property introduced by Michael Sintek and Stephen Decker is enough simple and extendable to represent what you need. Basic contexts may be represented with it. But you can also subProperty it. This is simple and efficient. What people needs on the sem web: semantic grounding. Lets use subProperting and well-chosen facets of contextualization to define properties that expresses contexts (dark contexts, assertionnal ones, terminologicals...). With this property, statements may belong to multiple contexts enabling also classes as instances, and other semantic level differences. The only problem is that you must reify. But is that a problem as we will use human-readable/codable languages that will be translated to a very very very ugly/verbose/awful RDF/XML syntax that will be machine readable/processable and, in those tasks, what is the most important, 'many-context-assignable'. I allready do use this method in my plays to not code twice the same facts and rules. I just say in another document that i use same informations in an other context. There are some rules somewhere that define semantic grounding (axioms selection) given a class of context. Thanks for your feed-back. Didier.
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2002 20:47:10 UTC