[Linking-open-data] Suggestions for owl:sameAs reciprocity Re: Terminology Quest
Bernard Vatant writes on 2007-07-24
in response to
[Linking-open-data] Terminology Question concerning Web Architecture and Lin (Booth, David (HP Software - Boston))
:
NB: answer to LOD list only. This thread is making a lot of noise on
several lists :-( .
>> For the most part, the only way one can be sure
>> that two URIs really do name the same resource is if they are provably
>> defined to do so, such as: (a) if they are the same URI; (b) if one is
>> declared by its owner to be owl:sameAs the other; or (c) if the URI
>> declarations are exactly the same.
>>
>
> Why (in b above) only "by its owner"?
>
> Is it because only the owner of URI A "really knows" what URI A means?
> If so, how does the owner of URI A know what URI B "really" means?
Seems to me that, whatever the meaning, a best practice concerning
assertions such as "a:foo owl:sameAs b:bar" should be grounded on some
form of agreement of the owners of a:foo and b:bar, on whichever basis
they both decide to agree - this long thread shows that there is no
universal way to ground such agreement, which belongs to the realm of
language and social communication.
For outsiders (owning neither a or b), such agreement could be shown by
the presence of the assertion in symmetrical way in both domains, each
domain using its own URI on subject side, and the other's on object
side, that is :
(a) asserts "a:foo owl:sameAs b:bar"
(b) asserts "b:bar owl:sameAs a:foo"
Granted, from a pure logical viewpoint, those assertions are strictly
equivalent since owl:sameAs is a symmetrical property, but from a
social/trust viewpoint, having each side declaring it in a specific
direction could be interpreted as a formal proof of agreement. It's what
have been done e.g. between DBpedia and GeoNames.
If one side (a) pushes those assertions first, the other side (b) should
be at least made aware of them by (a), and is entitled to say she agrees
or not : (a) says that a:foo owl:sameAs b:bar, but as the owner of (b),
I do not necessarily agree. Such lack of agreement could be implicitly
entailed from the absence of the reciprocal assertion on (b) side.
--
*Bernard Vatant
*Knowledge Engineering
----------------------------------------------------
*Mondeca**
*3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France
Web: www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com>
----------------------------------------------------
Tel: +33 (0) 871 488 459
Mail: [email hidden] <mailto:[email hidden]>
Blog: Leçons de Choses <http://mondeca.wordpress.com/>
