On 7/10/12 2:25 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
> On Tue, July 10, 2012 12:31, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 7/10/12 12:08 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
>>> On Sun, July 8, 2012 16:43, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>>> I think that URIs have already laid the seed for success. Its the
>>>> kernel
>>>> of the World Wide Web of documents, and it also facilitates a similar
>>>> Web of structured data. Personally, I don't think we need a design
>>>> competition, we just need to find a way to get everyone to see the
>>>> common ground that URIs provide -- when applied to structured data --
>>>> at Web-scale.
>>> One problem with URIs in the linked data community is coreferencing.
>>> Time and again new URIs are generated for things (individuals, classes,
>>> relations) for which URIs already exist.
>> No, that's an actual feature. You can deal with coreferences via
>> owl:sameAs or owl:inverseFunctionalProperty based reasoning and/or
>> custom rules.
> That's extra computation for those who know of the equivalences, and
> missing for those who don't. Consider the computational complexity for
> reasoning with owl:sameAs. (01)
Yes and No. I have more than 55 Billion triples at my disposal. 29
Billion for public access, a user agent would get the benefits of
reasoning driven coreference just by de-referencing a URI as they wonder
through the data spaces we manage. Its the Web. You can't mandate how
people or the agent they trigger surf the Web. (02)
Computation complexity doesn't have to be in the end-users face, for
instance. Handling the complexity can be value provided by an
infrastructure oriented service. (03)
This game is still all about good old lookups and views enhanced by
discovery patterns and relationship semantics that constitute Web
accessible structured data. (04)
>
>> Have many routes to the same data objects is never a bad thing.
> Actually, it is different data objects which (may) refer to the same thing.
>
> Many government view it to be a bad thing if there are many social
> security number data elements to the same data object (person). (05)
Come on now, how have you arrived at that exemple bearing in mind the
existence of semantics for inverse functional relationships in OWL etc? (06)
>
>>>> If we the world has come to appreciate Hypertext, why can't it do the
>>>> same with Hyperdata -- what entity-attribute-value model enhanced
>>>> with de-referencable URIs delivers under the Linked Data moniker?
>>> The triple model does not restrict the initial term ("entity") to be an
>>> individual, which the word here somewhat suggests. Nor need the
>>> "value" term be narrowly restricted".
>> It implies a denoted observation subject.
> "Subject" is what i suggested below. But i'm unsure what you mean by
> "observational" subject. (07)
Making statements about things in a realm of discourse via triples. (08)
>
>>> (Diamond formedBy CrystallizationProcess)
>>> Hyperdata also does not have to be restricted to triples:
>>> (DougF borrowedFrom GuttenbergBibleCopy3 LibraryOfCongress)
>>> Maybe subject-verb-object* would be a better description.
>> You've played around with literals that denote slots in a particular
>> type of 3-tuple, the semantics to the triple in question hasn't changed.
> That's a 4-tuple, not a 3-tuple; not a triple. In this case we could
> reify the
> borrowing and create a mass of 3-tuples (slots of a LibraryBorrowing event):
> (DougFsGuttenbergBorrowing owl:Type LibraryBorrowing)
> (DougFsGuttenbergBorrowing borrower DougF)
> (DougFsGuttenbergBorrowing lender LibraryOfCongress)
> (DougFsGuttenbergBorrowing borrowedItem GuttenbergBibleCopy3)
>
> Trying to express
> (Object1 spatiallyBetween Object2 Object3)
> using only triples is even trickier. But if all you have is a hammer,
> you can try to make a nail out of the problem. (09)
You are moving all over the place with me here. Have I implied that
Triple patterns are the only vehicle for Hyperdata? And FWIW you can use
reification syntax to keep statements about anything down to triples,
the ultimate problem is the current reification vocabulary doesn't work
on the engineering side of things, so alternatives are needed if we
don't want to increase computing costs across the board. There's work
taking place that will soon be published with engineered examples in the
not too distant future.
>
>>>> If we can just get beyond "rip and replace" narratives and then orient
>>>> towards full appreciation of the technology innovation continuum within
>>>> which this all exists, the rest will fall into place quite naturally.
>>>> I think we call all use the URI as a common foundation for broad
>>>> agreement re. data access, integration, and representation :-)\
>>> I suggest emphasizing the use of URIs from standard predefined
>>> ontologies and term sets as much as possible.
>> We should always encourage reuse when building anything.
> Agreed.
>
>>> Much of what one wants to
>>> refer to already has URIs -- in UMLS, SUMO, GeoNames, Gene Ontology,
>>> DBpedia, and Cyc, for example.
>> But you can't assume or mandate that.
> Where do you find "assume" or "mandate" in "emphasiz[e] the use of
> URIs from standard predefined ontologies"? (010)
Okay, we agree then since you appear to imply gentle cajoling instead. (011)
>
>> People will coalesce around what
>> works best for them and their respective problem domains. We always get
>> into trouble when we mandate things to fellow humans :-)
> Such as the use of URIs, triples, and RDF? (012)
Anything. (013)
>
> Actually, i find this comment ironic from someone who started the thread
> with "we just need to find a way to get everyone to see the common
> ground that URIs provide". (014)
What's ironic about seeking common ground? That statement doesn't imply
mandates or anything draconian. (015)
>
>>> Individual people who have been active on the web also are
>>> likely to have multiple URIs referencing them already.
>> Of course, and that's a very good thing, IMHO.
> It's good for people who want to make it harder for disparate information
> about them to be brought together in one dossier. (016)
Why would anyone seek to make it harder just because they mint their own
URIs? There are number of reasons why folks will mint their own URIs. (017)
> However, most linked-
> data advocates want to be able to assemble knowledge from sources which
> were unaware of each other. (018)
Yes, via follow-your-nose patterns. And nothing stops publishers of
Linked Data aiding and alleviating the costs of corefrence. (019)
Kingsley
> -- doug foxvog
>
>> Kingsley
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Kingsley Idehen
>>>> Founder & CEO
>>>> OpenLink Software
>>>> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>>> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>>> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
>>>> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
>>>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kingsley Idehen
>> Founder & CEO
>> OpenLink Software
>> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
>> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> (020)
-- (021)
Regards, (022)
Kingsley Idehen
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen (023)
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_________________________________________________________________
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 (01)
|