Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Aidan Hogan]

On 04-04-2016 17:31, Martin Hepp wrote:

Dear Axel:


On 03 Apr 2016, at 21:04, Axel Polleres  wrote:

Dear Sarven, Aldo, friends,

After some research, I realized that SameSameButDifferent already has a URI at 
IMDB, maybe it could be re-used:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1368443/

HTH,
Axel


I am puzzled to see a founding member of the Pendatic* Web Working Group use 
the same URI for both an abstract ideal and a representation thereof...


* Pedantic.


Where have all the 303s gone, long time passing?
Where have all the 303s gone, long time ago?
Where have all the 303s gone?
Practitioners have picked them everyone.
Oh, when will they ever learn?
Oh, when will they ever learn?


;-)

Martin
---
martin hepp  http://www.heppnetz.de
mh...@computer.org  @mfhepp

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Martin Hepp]

Dear Axel:

> On 03 Apr 2016, at 21:04, Axel Polleres  wrote:
> 
> Dear Sarven, Aldo, friends,
> 
> After some research, I realized that SameSameButDifferent already has a URI 
> at IMDB, maybe it could be re-used:
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1368443/
> 
> HTH,
> Axel

I am puzzled to see a founding member of the Pendatic Web Working Group use the 
same URI for both an abstract ideal and a representation thereof... 

Where have all the 303s gone, long time passing?
Where have all the 303s gone, long time ago?
Where have all the 303s gone?
Practitioners have picked them everyone.
Oh, when will they ever learn?
Oh, when will they ever learn?


;-)

Martin
---
martin hepp  http://www.heppnetz.de
mh...@computer.org  @mfhepp

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Axel Polleres]

Dear Sarven, Aldo, friends,

After some research, I realized that SameSameButDifferent already has a URI at 
IMDB, maybe it could be re-used:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1368443/

HTH,
Axel

> On 01 Apr 2016, at 19:22, Aldo Gangemi  wrote:
> 
> Sarven, your April Fool’s provocation started a really serious thread ;)
> 
>> On 01 Apr 2016, at 18:15, Simon Spero  wrote:
>> 
>> It's less of a  joke when it's a much argued topic within philosophical 
>> Ontology.
>> 
>> Your proposal is somewhat close to Geach's denial of absolute identity, 
>> though it is not clear what your precise stance on identity is, or, if you 
>> own a donkey, whether you have stopped beating it.
>> 
>> Can you clarify whether you are dispensing with entities?
>> 
>> Also, can you write up the other required changes to the OWL specifications 
>> required to prevent backdoor assertions that are equivalent to sameAs - 
>> Monday morning would be ideal so I'm going to need you work on it on 
>> Saturday. Yeah,  that would be great.
>> 
>> Simon
>> 
>> On Apr 1, 2016 9:10 AM, "Sarven Capadisli"  wrote:
>> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this 
>> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>> 
>> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive 
>> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>> 
>> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be minimal 
>> confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can define it 
>> along the lines of:
>> 
>> 
>> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things. 
>> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI references 
>> actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some 
>> circumstances.
>> 
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
>> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
>> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>> 
>> -Sarven
>> http://csarven.ca/#i
>> 
> 

--
Prof. Dr. Axel Polleres
Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna
url: http://www.polleres.net/  twitter: @AxelPolleres

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Axel Polleres]

Dear Sarven, Aldo, friends,

After some research, I realized that SameSameButDifferent already has a URI at 
IMDB, maybe it could be re-used:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1368443/

HTH,
Axel

> On 01 Apr 2016, at 19:22, Aldo Gangemi  wrote:
> 
> Sarven, your April Fool’s provocation started a really serious thread ;)
> 
>> On 01 Apr 2016, at 18:15, Simon Spero  wrote:
>> 
>> It's less of a  joke when it's a much argued topic within philosophical 
>> Ontology.
>> 
>> Your proposal is somewhat close to Geach's denial of absolute identity, 
>> though it is not clear what your precise stance on identity is, or, if you 
>> own a donkey, whether you have stopped beating it.
>> 
>> Can you clarify whether you are dispensing with entities?
>> 
>> Also, can you write up the other required changes to the OWL specifications 
>> required to prevent backdoor assertions that are equivalent to sameAs - 
>> Monday morning would be ideal so I'm going to need you work on it on 
>> Saturday. Yeah,  that would be great.
>> 
>> Simon
>> 
>> On Apr 1, 2016 9:10 AM, "Sarven Capadisli"  wrote:
>> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this 
>> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>> 
>> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive 
>> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>> 
>> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be minimal 
>> confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can define it 
>> along the lines of:
>> 
>> 
>> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things. 
>> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI references 
>> actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some 
>> circumstances.
>> 
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
>> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
>> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>> 
>> -Sarven
>> http://csarven.ca/#i
>> 
> 

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Reto Gmür]

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, at 15:01, Sarven Capadisli wrote:
> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at 
> this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
> 
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a 
> massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
> 
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be 
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we 
> can define it along the lines of:
> 
> 
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to 
> things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two 
> URI references actually refer to the same thing but may be different 
> under some circumstances.
> 
> 
> Thoughts?

I fully agree that owl:sameAs is often used wrongly, however it is
currently *the* way to indicate that a resource has several names, so
unless you suggest to introduce a unique name assumption it's hard to
live without this property. 

A solution would be what I suggested on this list 9 years ago [1]: to
abolish named nodes.

So rather than expressing that a resource has two names with
 owl:sameAs  one would
have a node with two names, expressed as typed literals, e.g.:
[ owl:hasName "http://example.org/foo"^^xsd:IRI; owl:hasName
"http://example.org/bar"^^xsd:IRI].

The concrete syntaxes could still support using named node as they do
now, but it would just be syntactic sugar for the owl:hasName triple.
With such an approach there is no major change like introducing a unique
name assumption, owl:sameAs would be obsolete and for linked data more
appropriate properties like rdfs:seeAlso or skos:closeMatch, or
something else.

Cheers,
Reto


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2007Aug/0239.html

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Simon Spero]

It's less of a  joke when it's a much argued topic within philosophical
Ontology.

Your proposal is somewhat close to Geach's denial of absolute identity,
though it is not clear what your precise stance on identity is, or, if you
own a donkey, whether you have stopped beating it.

Can you clarify whether you are dispensing with entities?

Also, can you write up the other required changes to the OWL specifications
required to prevent backdoor assertions that are equivalent to sameAs -
Monday morning would be ideal so I'm going to need you work on it on
Saturday. Yeah,  that would be great.

Simon
On Apr 1, 2016 9:10 AM, "Sarven Capadisli"  wrote:

> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this
> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive
> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
>
>
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things.
> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
>
>

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Barry Norton]

Rarely has religious trolling been so richly rewarded. Thanks for being so 
humorously on board (and not burning me at the stake!)

Barry

On 1 April 2016, at 16:50, Norman Gray  wrote:


Greetings.

On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:25, Barry Norton wrote:

> Is that transitive? Like in the Christian trinity...

...which naturally requires me to propose

owl:sameAsHomoousianly
owl:sameAsHomoiousianly
owl:sameAsHeteroousianly
owl:sameAsArianoid
owl:sameAsAthanasiusoid
owl:sameAsCumFiloque

At which point: ladies and gentlemen, sharpen your weapons; today is a 
good day for someone to get excommunicated.

If you thought httpRange-14 was bad, _this_ one could run and run and 
run.

Happy Friday,

Norman


-- 
Norman Gray  :  https://nxg.me.uk
SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Norman Gray]

Greetings.

On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:25, Barry Norton wrote:


Is that transitive? Like in the Christian trinity...


...which naturally requires me to propose

owl:sameAsHomoousianly
owl:sameAsHomoiousianly
owl:sameAsHeteroousianly
owl:sameAsArianoid
owl:sameAsAthanasiusoid
owl:sameAsCumFiloque

At which point: ladies and gentlemen, sharpen your weapons; today is a 
good day for someone to get excommunicated.


If you thought httpRange-14 was bad, _this_ one could run and run and 
run.


Happy Friday,

Norman


--
Norman Gray  :  https://nxg.me.uk
SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Kerstin Forsberg]

Nice thread
We have proposed a justification framework for medical terminology
mappings, see
https://www.slideshare.net/kerfors/cim2014

http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~fm206/cim14/cim20140_submission_2.pdf

On Friday, 1 April 2016, Barry Norton  wrote:

> Or we could stop building naive applications that treat assertion as fact,
> and instead only reason on statements we accept based on trust and
> provenance. Wasn't that the plan?
>
> Regards,
>
> Barry
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Sarven Capadisli  > wrote:
>
>> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at
>> this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>>
>> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a
>> massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>>
>> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
>> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
>> define it along the lines of:
>>
>>
>> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to
>> things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
>> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
>> circumstances.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
>> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
>> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>>
>> -Sarven
>> http://csarven.ca/#i
>>
>>
>

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Herbert Van de Sompel]

On Apr 1, 2016, at 07:28, Melvin Carvalho  wrote:
>> On 1 April 2016 at 15:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
>> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this 
>> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>> 
>> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive 
>> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>> 
>> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be minimal 
>> confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can define it 
>> along the lines of:
>> 
>> 
>> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things. 
>> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI references 
>> actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some 
>> circumstances.
> 
> What about
> 
> owl : sometimesSameAs
>  

Given my background in Memento "Time Travel for the Web", I am delighted that 
the temporal aspect is finally brought up. Sameness frequently depends on 
temporal context. Hence, I think sometimesSameAs would be very valuable. In 
other cases, things are just always the same irrespective of time. I would 
propose adding sameAsItEverWas to deal with such situations.

Herbert


>> 
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
>> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
>> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>> 
>> -Sarven
>> http://csarven.ca/#i
> 

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Harry Halpin]

As someone who looked fairly deeply into owl:sameAs use, the problem is not
fatal but is endemic. Nonetheless about 1/3 of the sameAs usages are
actually more or less similarity and better handled by statistics. The rest
require likely domain specific predicates. Logic and the world do not layer
easily. I am certain the problem of 'owl:butReallySameAs' would inherit the
same issues. Nonetheless more research is needed.
On Apr 1, 2016 10:07 AM, "Aldo Gangemi"  wrote:

> Hi, I think you are just noticing the effects of real life when logic gets
> actually used. All predicates can get misused, because their semantics
> cannot be just syntactically checked, it depends on the intentions and
> practices of modellers and users of applications.
>
> On the other hand, there are already other predicates that can be used,
> such as rdfs:seeAlso, skos:closeMatch, etc., let alone probabilistic and
> fuzzy varieties of OWL for reasoning in presence of uncertainties of
> various kinds.
>
> I’d rather keep the problem of creating vocabularies separate from that of
> cleaning up existing data. The second can be done for specific needs (see
> e.g. a recent paper by Heiko Paulheim and myself on scalable DBpedia
> cleanup [1]), while the dream of a global consistent semantic web is
> unsustainable, owl:sameAs or anything not the same of a different sameness
> :)
>
> Ciao
> Aldo
>
> [http://www.heikopaulheim.com/docs/iswc2015.pdf]
>
> > On 01 Apr 2016, at 15:32, Henry Story  wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
> >>
> >> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at
> this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
> >>
> >> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a
> massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
> >>
> >> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
> >>
> >>
> >> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to
> things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
> >
> > What you need is mereologial logic so that you can start speaking of
> things overlapping, being mostly the same, etc...
> > See Slide 26 of Jim Hendler's talk ( and the whole set of slides)
> > "On Beyond OWL: challenges for ontologies on the Web"
> >
> >
> http://www.slideshare.net/jahendler/on-beyond-owl-challenges-for-ontologies-on-the-web
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> >> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> >> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
> >>
> >> -Sarven
> >> http://csarven.ca/#i
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Aldo Gangemi]

Hi, I think you are just noticing the effects of real life when logic gets 
actually used. All predicates can get misused, because their semantics cannot 
be just syntactically checked, it depends on the intentions and practices of 
modellers and users of applications.

On the other hand, there are already other predicates that can be used, such as 
rdfs:seeAlso, skos:closeMatch, etc., let alone probabilistic and fuzzy 
varieties of OWL for reasoning in presence of uncertainties of various kinds.

I’d rather keep the problem of creating vocabularies separate from that of 
cleaning up existing data. The second can be done for specific needs (see e.g. 
a recent paper by Heiko Paulheim and myself on scalable DBpedia cleanup [1]), 
while the dream of a global consistent semantic web is unsustainable, 
owl:sameAs or anything not the same of a different sameness :)

Ciao
Aldo

[http://www.heikopaulheim.com/docs/iswc2015.pdf]

> On 01 Apr 2016, at 15:32, Henry Story  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
>> 
>> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this 
>> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>> 
>> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive 
>> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>> 
>> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be minimal 
>> confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can define it 
>> along the lines of:
>> 
>> 
>> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things. 
>> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI references 
>> actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some 
>> circumstances.
> 
> What you need is mereologial logic so that you can start speaking of things 
> overlapping, being mostly the same, etc...
> See Slide 26 of Jim Hendler's talk ( and the whole set of slides)
> "On Beyond OWL: challenges for ontologies on the Web"
> 
> http://www.slideshare.net/jahendler/on-beyond-owl-challenges-for-ontologies-on-the-web
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
>> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
>> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>> 
>> -Sarven
>> http://csarven.ca/#i
>> 
> 
> 

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Paul Houle]

It is not about stopping building naive applications,  it is about starting
to build smart applications..

Trust and provenance will only get you so far.  It can easily be the royal
road to becoming very good at seeing the Emperor's clothes.  Even
authoritative sources often have singularities or mismatches that make
basic invariants you'd expect wrong.

Decades ago my friends and I were reading the CIA World Fact book on a
Friday night and thinking how profound it was that there was a $100 billion
excess of global "exports" over "imports" and perhaps we'd stumbled on
evidence of extraterrestrial life or perhaps a secret civilization hidden
underground.

Eventually we figured it was that some of the exports wind up on the ocean
floor,  washing up to shore,  or stuck for centuries in gyres.  Also there
is a ratchet effect that pirates, government officials and other thieves
are more likely to remove valuable exports from ships and warehouses than
deposit them and so forth.

Now the accountants have gone through 15 years of blood, sweat and tears to
get XBRL financial reports which are logically sound 99% of the time for
U.S. public companies.  It is a problem for financial reports,  if you are
preparing them for the state,  the bank,  investors,  etc. and these
invariants are not met.

Structurally all kinds of demographic and similar numbers can be hypercubed
like XBRL but for a whole bunch of reasons,  will defy reason and never
quite "add up" when you compare multiple sources.  (I can point to a census
block where 200 people did not get counted because I didn't count them;
 the World Bank numbers for Nigeria are implausible for many reasons,  etc.)

As Reagan said it,  "Trust but verify" and that the essence of being a
reasonable animal.

Compare your input data with itself,  against its requirements,  against
the experience of the system and its users and you will find your
(system's) truth.





On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Barry Norton  wrote:

> Or we could stop building naive applications that treat assertion as fact,
> and instead only reason on statements we accept based on trust and
> provenance. Wasn't that the plan?
>
> Regards,
>
> Barry
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
>
>> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at
>> this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>>
>> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a
>> massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>>
>> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
>> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
>> define it along the lines of:
>>
>>
>> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to
>> things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
>> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
>> circumstances.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
>> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
>> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>>
>> -Sarven
>> http://csarven.ca/#i
>>
>>
>


-- 
Paul Houle

*Applying Schemas for Natural Language Processing, Distributed Systems,
Classification and Text Mining and Data Lakes*

(607) 539 6254paul.houle on Skype   ontolo...@gmail.com

:BaseKB -- Query Freebase Data With SPARQL
http://basekb.com/gold/

Legal Entity Identifier Lookup
https://legalentityidentifier.info/lei/lookup/


Join our Data Lakes group on LinkedIn
https://www.linkedin.com/grp/home?gid=8267275

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Aldo Gangemi]

Hi, I think you are just noticing the effects of real life when logic gets 
actually used. All predicates can get misused, because their semantics cannot 
be just syntactically checked, it depends on the intentions and practices of 
modellers and users of applications.

On the other hand, there are already other predicates that can be used, such as 
rdfs:seeAlso, skos:closeMatch, etc., let alone probabilistic and fuzzy 
varieties of OWL for reasoning in presence of uncertainties of various kinds.

I’d rather keep the problem of creating vocabularies separate from that of 
cleaning up existing data. The second can be done for specific needs (see e.g. 
a recent paper by Heiko Paulheim and myself on scalable DBpedia cleanup [1]), 
while the dream of a global consistent semantic web is unsustainable, 
owl:sameAs or anything not the same of a different sameness :)

Ciao
Aldo

[]

> On 01 Apr 2016, at 15:32, Henry Story  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
>> 
>> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this 
>> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>> 
>> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive 
>> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>> 
>> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be minimal 
>> confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can define it 
>> along the lines of:
>> 
>> 
>> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things. 
>> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI references 
>> actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some 
>> circumstances.
> 
> What you need is mereologial logic so that you can start speaking of things 
> overlapping, being mostly the same, etc...
> See Slide 26 of Jim Hendler's talk ( and the whole set of slides)
> "On Beyond OWL: challenges for ontologies on the Web"
> 
> http://www.slideshare.net/jahendler/on-beyond-owl-challenges-for-ontologies-on-the-web
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
>> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
>> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>> 
>> -Sarven
>> http://csarven.ca/#i
>> 
> 
> 

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Ghislain Atemezing]

Thanks Pieter, 
> Le 1 avr. 2016 à 15:40, Pieter Colpaert  a écrit :
> 
> https://github.com/pietercolpaert/samesamebutdifferent/blob/master/vocabulary.ttl
>  
> 

Cool . I am in the process of reviewing the new ontology to be added into LOV. 
But I am getting some issues.. Could you please add more metadata, multilingual 
labels, and a human readable documentation of the vocabulary? 

TIA

Ghislain


Ghislain A. Atemezing, Ph.D 
R&D Engineer
@ Mondeca, Paris, France
Labs: http://labs.mondeca.com  
Tel: +33 (0)1 4111 3034
Web: www.mondeca.com 
Twitter: @gatemezing
About Me:  https://w3id.org/people/gatemezing 

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Dimitris Kontokostas]

I would prefer to leave things as use and create owl:actuallySameAs and
when this gets abused we can create owl:actuallySameAsReally

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Henry Story  wrote:

>
> > On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
> >
> > There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at
> this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
> >
> > The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a
> massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
> >
> > I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
> >
> >
> > The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to
> things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
>
> What you need is mereologial logic so that you can start speaking of
> things overlapping, being mostly the same, etc...
> See Slide 26 of Jim Hendler's talk ( and the whole set of slides)
> "On Beyond OWL: challenges for ontologies on the Web"
>
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/jahendler/on-beyond-owl-challenges-for-ontologies-on-the-web
>
>
> >
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> > [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> > [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
> >
> > -Sarven
> > http://csarven.ca/#i
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Kontokostas Dimitris

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Wouter Beek]

Hi Sarven,

Be careful what you wish for!  Conference organizers may claim that
"PDF-paper owl:sameSameButDifferent HTML-paper", in which case submission
formats do not need to be changed.

:-P

---
Cheers!,
Wouter.

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Pieter Colpaert]

Hi Sarven,

I love the idea and I'm a big fan of your work filling my inbox with 
public-lod mails!


Yet I believe this discussion is becoming too ad-hoc. In order to get a 
bit of a structure into this, feel free to fork my samesamebutdifferent 
ontology and pull request your suggestions:


https://github.com/pietercolpaert/samesamebutdifferent/blob/master/vocabulary.ttl

I already added the things we have come up with in turtle. As we are not 
responsible for OWL, I suggest creating a new ontology on a new namespace.


Kind regards,

Pieter

P.S. Also feel free to donate a proper domain name for this

On 01-04-16 15:28, Melvin Carvalho wrote:



On 1 April 2016 at 15:01, Sarven Capadisli > wrote:


There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident
at this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.

The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a
massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.

I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will
be minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among
us, we can define it along the lines of:


The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to
things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that
two URI references actually refer to the same thing but may be
different under some circumstances.


What about

owl : sometimesSameAs



Thoughts?

[1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
[2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
[3] http://schema.org/sameAs

-Sarven
http://csarven.ca/#i




--
+32486747122
Linked Open Transport Data researcher
Ghent University - Data Science Lab - iMinds

Board of Directors Open Knowledge Belgium
http://openknowledge.be

Open Transport working group coordinator at Open Knowledge International
http://transport.okfn.org

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Henry Story]

> On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
> 
> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this 
> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
> 
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive 
> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
> 
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be minimal 
> confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can define it 
> along the lines of:
> 
> 
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things. 
> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI references 
> actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some 
> circumstances.

What you need is mereologial logic so that you can start speaking of things 
overlapping, being mostly the same, etc...
See Slide 26 of Jim Hendler's talk ( and the whole set of slides)
"On Beyond OWL: challenges for ontologies on the Web"

 
http://www.slideshare.net/jahendler/on-beyond-owl-challenges-for-ontologies-on-the-web


> 
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
> 
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
> 

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Paul Houle]

I like the predicate :rewritesTo where

:x :rewritesTo :y .

entails that

:x ?a ?b => :y ?a ?b
?a :x ?b => ?a :y ?b
?a ?b :x => ?a ?b :y

And the "=>" means the second triple REPLACES the original triple.  For
instance this is often done when copying triples from one graph to
another.  This same operation can be done on triples that appear in a
SPARQL query.

The above accomplishes what people are trying to accomplish with owl:sameAs
with the difference that it 'works' in the sense that it doesn't cause the
number of entailments to explode.  If you are one of the few and the proud
who care if they get useful results to SPARQL queries it is a good way to
maintain a "UNA bubble" and seems to be a rather complete solution to the
problem of merging concepts.

now :sameButDifferent is a more complex one,  although the likes of count
Korzybski would maintain that

?a owl:sameAs ?a

is not necessarily true since ?a can be inevitably split into sub concepts.
 ("i.e. the number 2 that belongs to the emperor",  "the number 2 that,
 from a long ways away,  looks like a fly")

Concept splits are a different issue because you need a rule base or other
procedure to look a concept + surrounding relationships and decide how to
do the split.  It is very doable but it takes more than one triple to
express it.




On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:

> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this
> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive
> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
>
>
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things.
> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
>
>


-- 
Paul Houle

*Applying Schemas for Natural Language Processing, Distributed Systems,
Classification and Text Mining and Data Lakes*

(607) 539 6254paul.houle on Skype   ontolo...@gmail.com

:BaseKB -- Query Freebase Data With SPARQL
http://basekb.com/gold/

Legal Entity Identifier Lookup
https://legalentityidentifier.info/lei/lookup/


Join our Data Lakes group on LinkedIn
https://www.linkedin.com/grp/home?gid=8267275

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Melvin Carvalho]

On 1 April 2016 at 15:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:

> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this
> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive
> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
>
>
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things.
> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
>

What about

owl : sometimesSameAs


>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
>
>

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Barry Norton]

Is that transitive? Like in the Christian trinity...



On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Hugh Glaser  wrote:

> And would we also have owl:differentDifferentButSame?
>
> The built-in OWL property owl:differentDifferentButSame links things to
> things. Such an owl:differentDifferentButSame statement indicates that two
> URI references actually refer to different things but may be the same under
> some circumstances.
>
> > On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
> >
> > There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at
> this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
> >
> > The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a
> massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
> >
> > I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
> >
> >
> > The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to
> things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
> >
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> > [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> > [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
> >
> > -Sarven
> > http://csarven.ca/#i
> >
>
>
>

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Alvaro Graves]

I like it, will it be a subproperty of owl:isKindaLike ?

On Friday, April 1, 2016, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:

> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this
> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive
> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
>
>
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things.
> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
>
>

-- 
Alvaro Graves-Fuenzalida, PhD
Web: http://graves.cl - Twitter: @alvarograves

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Barry Norton]

... and, yes, I'm aware of the date but any chance for a dig ;)

Cheers,

Barry

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Barry Norton  wrote:

> Or we could stop building naive applications that treat assertion as fact,
> and instead only reason on statements we accept based on trust and
> provenance. Wasn't that the plan?
>
> Regards,
>
> Barry
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
>
>> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at
>> this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>>
>> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a
>> massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>>
>> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
>> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
>> define it along the lines of:
>>
>>
>> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to
>> things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
>> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
>> circumstances.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
>> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
>> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>>
>> -Sarven
>> http://csarven.ca/#i
>>
>>
>

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Hugh Glaser]

And would we also have owl:differentDifferentButSame?

The built-in OWL property owl:differentDifferentButSame links things to things. 
Such an owl:differentDifferentButSame statement indicates that two URI 
references actually refer to different things but may be the same under some 
circumstances.

> On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
> 
> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this 
> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
> 
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive 
> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
> 
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be minimal 
> confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can define it 
> along the lines of:
> 
> 
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things. 
> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI references 
> actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some 
> circumstances.
> 
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
> 
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
> 

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Barry Norton]

Or we could stop building naive applications that treat assertion as fact,
and instead only reason on statements we accept based on trust and
provenance. Wasn't that the plan?

Regards,

Barry

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:

> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this
> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive
> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be
> minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can
> define it along the lines of:
>
>
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things.
> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI
> references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
>
>

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Ruben Verborgh]

Wait, I'm confused.

Do you mean that
owl:sameSameButDifferent owl:sameSameButDifferent owl:sameAs.
?

Best,

Ruben

Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

[Martynas Jusevičius]

What about using SKOS instead, like the paper suggests?

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Sarven Capadisli  wrote:
> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this
> point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud.
>
> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive
> sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent.
>
> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be minimal
> confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can define it
> along the lines of:
>
>
> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to things.
> Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI references
> actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some
> circumstances.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21
> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs
> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs
>
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
>