ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] [semweb-31] Linked Open Data Questions

To: semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: ravi sharma <drravisharma@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 11:48:38 -0400
Message-id: <f872f57b0909030848m5879df16m10fd575041103c8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cory and Dean
 
Every URL is not necessarily an Information Link. I hope some are just data links and some more have some semantic or understanding related meaning. Are you folks on to something that would designate the value of information content in the URL by categorizing the Value-Metadata field or tag type associated with URL/URI. The RDF types are not quite there yet?
Thus the equations of relativity will, for example, have high value!
Models of ORION spacecraft that have been space qualified - such as "re-entry and safe landed spacecraft" info page rather than ICD / CDR document URL only will have different value levels? Vanilla flavored URI / URLs will only allow triples type searches but higher cognition type value chains ought to also emerge?
 
--
Thanks.
Ravi
(Dr. Ravi Sharma)
313 204 1740 Mobile


 
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 8:01 AM, Cory Casanave <cory-c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Ralph,

Absolutely agree about IRs representing multiple aspects/viewpoints of a TINW – I would be interested in your definitions of aspect & viewpoint in this regard to see how we are matching up.  To clarify, representation of the TINW is pure identity – anything that is said about it is in an IR and the TINW is the glue between them as they are aspects/viewpoints of the same thing.  I will take a look at how your are approaching this once it is on oeGOV.

 

As you may know we are also doing architectural integration and conversions, I would be very interested in your OWL interpretations of SySML and other languages.  Are you going to be releasing that on oeGOV?   We are releasing an initial part  (Structural conversion of anything in XMI) as open source on ModelDiven.org very soon.  In any case, collaborating on this may make sense.

 

As for a model being a view for a purpose – we have to be carful about that – the information we publish as models will and should be used for all kinds of purposes that the publisher may not have intended – this is part of the open and transparent government idea.  I would say a model is a perspective on the world.  It is up to a user of a model to decide if that perspective is valid for their purpose.  The same is, of course, true of any data set.  This makes it important for the perspective to be clearly specified.

 

-Cory

 


From: semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ralph Hodgson
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 7:30 PM


To: semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [semweb-31] Linked Open Data Questions

 

Cory - Pitching in, but really with no time to do this. So brief I will be.

Cory Casanave wrote:

Hi Dean,
Yes, skos:exactMatch is much more palatable.  However I wondering if it
may be a good idea to more formally recognize this difference between an
information resource and what the information resource is about (the
thing in the world).
When we want to understand there are different viewpoints and
authorities making statements about something then we start to want the
information to have its own identity and to be able to talk about that
information as different from the subject of the information. 

Any ontology work must recognize that there are different spaces (call them Information Spaces - IS) in which meanings are shared. In the case of an IR, in one IS it might have "about-hood" in another space it may be "of-hood". What does this mean? The notion of "thing-in-the-world" (TINW) should be carefully discerned when we are talking IRs. 

I will use examples from System Engineering, SE, (not Software Engineering - hard sometimes to agree "TINW" for that often). So if I have an ORION vehicle (future APOLLO-like space vehicle) what am I referring to - an instance of an ORION, a type of vehicle, the "As-Designed", "As-Built", "As-Maintained" IRs? And what Aspect and Viewpoint are we dealing with (notice I distinguish "aspect" from "viewpoint").  IRs exist for different aspects of the vehicle and different viewpoints, and an IR has "about-ness" that represents a transference of concepts, properties and axioms to a specific IS - the map of the Mall is not the Mall.

One further piece, an IR can also have an IRD - an Information Resource Description - what an IR is. An example helps. Consider an Interface Control Document (ICD) as an IR. There is a ICD Description saying that an ICD has two or more system elements and a set of constraints for the interfacing, etc.  Condensing 3 modeling styles into one sentence: this would be an owl:Class (or sub-class of owl:Class if OWL-full is allowed) with sub-classes (or owl:Classes) for different types of ICD (or instances if expressing types as instances is acceptable practice ). A particular ICD for a specific type of interfacing would reference the ICD Description. Sometimes this is referred to as a "class-instance" mirror (or metaclass-class mirror) pattern.

Where do we find SE models that make these distinctions? As you may know, I have taken SysML and made OWL versions in SysMO.  DoDAF 2.0 we have converted to OWL. NIEM also. All these offer examples of IRs, IRDs and ISs. At NASA, NExIOM ontologies have these distinctions because Enterprise Architecture meets Data Architecture and System (think vehicle as as well as Information System) Models.

For oeGov, we have a start on separating these concerns. If we are to collaborate on this, as you well know, joint work needs a common meta-level of how we want to express our cognitions about "things" and "spaces". If we achieve that we progress at the model level. Currently LOD is happening with "little-o" efforts - very light ontologies. The pragmatists of LOD are doing quite well without heavy models. So perhaps there is time to get "midsize-o" work happening?



 This gets
back to some of the reification issues we discussed long ago.
So if we wanted to say that <information resource> represents <identity>
we could have the option of combining or contrasting information
resources about the same identity.  The other way may be to say that
<information resource> skos:exactMatch <information resource>, but that
is a somewhat different semantic.
  

Meanings are affordances that happen when we are clear on how cognitions in one space of viewing the world are applicable in other (information) spaces. These  spaces constitute how we organize our representations for putting distinctions to work - we might think of this as "transference of meanings". Simply stated - a model is a view for a purpose (how 'applicable' has meaning). There is difficulty always in thinking about notions of the "real world".

I just purchased you book and have not had a chance to read it yet -
perhaps it has all the answers!
It would seem to me that some consensus on such an approach for LOD
would be a good idea.  Thanks for the pointers.
-Cory
 
-----Original Message-----
From: semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Dean Allemang
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 5:42 PM
To: semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [semweb-31] Linked Open Data Questions
 
Cory Casanave wrote:
  
We distinguish "information" resources from logical ones.
    
Informational resources are dereferenceable as a URL and have a set of
triples that are the facts about that informational resource from the
point of view of the publisher, who is the owner of that URL.
Informational resources have a triple (not yet sure if we want to commit
to sameas) that references the identity of the logical resource that is
the subject of that informational resource.  Logical URI is the identity
of the real world entity or concept, not information about that entity
or concept.  So the information has an identity that is connected to but
not the same as the underlying entity.
  
  
    
 
Just on the topic of commitment to owl:sameAs, an alternative (which is 
still a commitment, but perhaps more palatable in some contexts) is to 
commit to skos:exactMatch 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/PR-skos-reference-20090615/#mapping).  I have
 
found this to be sensible in certain contexts where, for one reason or 
another, I am not quite willing to make the very strong logical 
commitment that owl:sameAs entails.
 
Dean
 
 
 
 
 
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone
on this mailing list (semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx)
http://semweb.meetup.com/31/
This message was sent by Dean Allemang (dallemang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) from
The Washington Semantic Web Meetup.
To learn more about Dean Allemang, visit his/her member profile:
http://semweb.meetup.com/31/members/8494388/
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here:
http://www.meetup.com/account/comm/
Meetup Support: support@xxxxxxxxxx
632 Broadway, New York, NY 10012 USA
 
 
 
 
 
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list (semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx)
http://semweb.meetup.com/31/
This message was sent by Cory Casanave (cory-c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) from The Washington Semantic Web Meetup.
To learn more about Cory Casanave, visit his/her member profile: http://semweb.meetup.com/31/members/9543609/
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here: http://www.meetup.com/account/comm/
Meetup Support: support@xxxxxxxxxx
632 Broadway, New York, NY 10012 USA
 
 
 
  



-- 
Ralph Hodgson
CTO and Executive Partner, TopQuadrant, Inc., www.topquadrant.com, http://twitter.com/TopQuadrant
VA Office: (703) 299-9330, CA Office: (650) 265-0529, eFax: (425) 955-5469, Cell: (781) 789-1664
http://twitter.com/ralphtq





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list (semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx)
This message was sent by Ralph Hodgson (rhodgson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) from The Washington Semantic Web Meetup.
To learn more about Ralph Hodgson, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here

Meetup Support: support@xxxxxxxxxx
632 Broadway, New York, NY 10012 USA





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list (semweb-31@xxxxxxxxxx)
This message was sent by Cory Casanave (cory-c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) from The Washington Semantic Web Meetup.
To learn more about Cory Casanave, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here

Meetup Support: support@xxxxxxxxxx
632 Broadway, New York, NY 10012 USA




_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>