On Jun 30, 2010, at 11:50 AM, Nathan wrote:

Pat Hayes wrote:
On Jun 30, 2010, at 6:45 AM, Toby Inkster wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:54:20 +0100
Dan Brickley <[email protected]> wrote:
That said, i'm sure sameAs and differentIndividual (or however it is
called) claims could probably make a mess, if added or removed...

You can create some pretty awesome messes even without OWL:

   # An rdf:List that loops around...

   <#mylist> a rdf:List ;
       rdf:first <#Alice> ;
       rdf:next <#mylist> .

   # A looping, branching mess...

   <#anotherlist> a rdf:List ;
       rdf:first <#anotherlist> ;
       rdf:next <#anotherlist> .

They might be messy, but they are *possible* structures using pointers, which is what the RDF vocabulary describes. Its just about impossible to guarantee that messes can't happen when all you are doing is describing structures in an open-world setting. But I think the cure is to stop thinking that possible-messes are a problem to be solved. So, there is dung in the road. Walk round it.

Could we also apply that to the 'subjects as literals' general discussion that's going on then?

For example I've heard people saying that it encourages bad 'linked data' practise by using examples like { 'London' a x:Place } - whereas I'd immediately counter with { x:London a 'Place' }.

Surely all of the subjects as literals arguments can be countered with 'walk round it', and further good practise could be aided by a few simple notes on best practise for linked data etc.

I wholly agree. Allowing literals in subject position in RDF is a no- brainer. (BTW, it would also immediately solve the 'bugs in the RDF rules' problem.) These arguments against it are nonsensical. The REAL argument against it is that it will mess up OWL-DL, or at any rate it *might* mess up OWL-DL.

The Description Logic police are still in charge:-)

Pat




Best,

Nathan



------------------------------------------------------------
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






Reply via email to