On 11/12/10 6:47 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
Last one for today!
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 16:05 -0500, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 11/12/10 1:31 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
<snip>
Not to be offensive but are you familiar with "begging the question?"
You are assuming that "...we can solve ambiguity in the context of
Linked Data oriented applications."*
A Linked Data application is capable of perceiving an E-A-V graph
representation of data. That's context it can establish from content.
OK, same claim, different verse. ;-)
Now you are claim that what is contained in an E-A-V graph is sufficient
to eliminate ambiguity.
Another assumption for which you offer no evidence.
No evidence if you don't use Linked Data or haven't developed a Linked
Data aware application.
Which profile are you re. the above, if any?
Being mindful that graphs are going to vary from source to source, how
can you now claim that any E-A-V graph is going to be sufficient to
eliminate ambiguity?
I am saying the FOL based statements in an EAV graph provide a enough
logical foundation for a Linked Data aware application to figure out a
lot of stuff, from the data.
At this point let's not speak in generalities. Make a case, and I show
you a SPARQL pattern with an answer for instance .
I want go on a wild goose chase with you though. You have to invest in
some Linked Data know how, if its new to you.
Repetition of the same claims doesn't advance the conversation.
Of course it doesn't. So let's play with some actual Linked Data!
Hope you have started a great weekend by this point!
Ditto.
Kingsley
Patrick
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President& CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
