On Jul 28, 2009, at 6:59 AM, <[email protected]> <[email protected]
> wrote:
Alan - I agree with not creating new URIs unnecessarily, but if you
are setting up your own knowledge base on a topic and want to add
new information about those resources, and you want the user to be
able to dereference the resource URI to find that information, then
it seems to me that you pretty quickly get to the point where you
have a decent reason to create your own URIs.
Sure, but those are URIs which are primarily used to identify the
information, not the topic of the information or the thing the
information is about. Another important principle that Alan might want
to endorse is, don't use the same URI to identify a thing and a source
of information about that thing. And don't say that one of them is
owl:sameAs the other. To paraphrase Korzybski's famous maxim, the
website is not the territory.
Pat Hayes
This will of course lead over time to a lot of owl:sameAs links all
over the place, but I think we just have to deal with that.
Without wanting to re-open an old thread, I broadly agree with
Richard Cyganiak's viewpoint in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2009Feb/0010.html
Cheers
Bill
Van: [email protected] namens Alan Ruttenberg
Verzonden: di 28-7-2009 3:47
Aan: Eric Lease Morgan
CC: [email protected]
Onderwerp: Re: owl:sameAs [recipe]
> --
Sorry to be critical, but there is an important principle here: First
do no harm. Willy nilly inventing URIs and entities when there are
perfectly good ones in existence is not "cool" from a semweb point of
view, and unnecessary use of sameAs is both burdensome and likely to
lead to gross errors, as I have pointed out in my previous emails.
-Alan
------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
