|
John,
Why would I use owl:sameAs if I can use the remotely
addressed original ID? I simply add information to that
ID.
So when a Chinese company wants the texts on some
presentation form (screen, document) in Chinese, and I have it in English,
I can produce that Chinese text by fetching it from the Chinese RDL
extension.
We can even store "boilerplate texts", because in ISO
15926 text strings are classes as well.
Regards,
Hans
Hans Teijgeler,
Laanweg 28,
1871 BJ Schoorl,
Netherlands
No sir that's not what I am saying. Please reread my post, and use
owl:sameAs.
On 2/2/2014 4:43 AM, Hans Teijgeler wrote:
John,
That happens already. You can create an extension of
the RDL in the French language and state:
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;RDS6462148">
<skos:altLabel>"API 610-BB2 ÉTAPE SIMPLE POMPE
CENTRIFUGE"@fr</skos:altLabel>
<skos:definition>"Un seul
ou deux étapes, la
roue entre paliers, carter fendu radial, pompe centrifuge conçu selon les exigences énoncées dans l'API 610 pour le
code pompes BB2."@fr</skos:definition>
........
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
and in
Chinese:
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;RDS6462148">
<skos:altLabel>"API610-BB2单级离心泵"@zh</skos:altLabel>
<skos:definition>"轴
承，径向剖分机壳，离
心泵根据API610码BB2泵规
定的要求设计之间的单一或
两个阶段，叶轮。"@zh</skos:definition>
........
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
Excuses for any funny Google
translation (if applicable).
Regards,
Hans
Hans Teijgeler,
Laanweg 28,
1871 BJ Schoorl,
Netherlands
Just define separate resources for an identifier
and translated names, each with an owl:sameAs triple directing either person
or tool to the normative resource, named in the author's own language. This
normative definition can contain rdfs:labels and or skos' labels or skos
notation who cares.
If one's tools can't handle owl:sameAs then
yeah, they're a bit primitive. (Fortunately semantic wikis handle sameAs quite
naturally).
My point is that if ontologies or datasets publish/use
identifiers of any sort, but don't publish also resources with such sameAs
triples, its authors risk unfriendly comments for foisting this task on
everyone else. So yeah, this is a best practice for identifiers that should be
in the communique for reuse.
/jmc
On 2/2/2014 1:15 AM, Matthew West wrote:
Dear
David, Ali, Amanda, and Kingsley,
Since
this arose from considering ISO 15926, and there was at least an implicit
criticism involved, let me just explain what we were expecting to
happen.
We
were not expecting others to use the thing ID in ISO 15926-2 to identify
their internal data in their programs or even databases, although this is,
of course, a choice that is available if it is convenient. We were expecting
a situation in which different systems had pre-existing names for the
different classes, and they were not about to change. One of the reasons we
had support for multiple names was so we could provide a mapping of these
names, minimising what was needed to be done within the existing systems. So
we expected local copies of the RDL to include the local names of the
classes for each system a names for those classes, with which systems used
that name, so that translations could be done. It was anticipated that the
RDL itself would be held in a database, and so a non-human readable ID would
be adequate.
Of
course things change in 10+ years, though we had similar discussions then,
that I note are being had now. In the end you have to decide, nothing is
likely to be right for everything.
Regards
Matthew
West
From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ali SH
Sent: 02 February 2014
00:52
To: Ontology Summit 2014 discussion
Subject: Re:
[ontology-summit] [ReusableContent] Partitioning the
problem
Dear Amanda,
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 6:59 PM, Amanda Vizedom <amanda.vizedom@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I understand, but I think it is mostly a tooling
problem. The tools do not use the appropriate formal language features.
Humans shouldn't be writing or debugging SPARQL queries with only the
concept ID visible, whether it is opaque or suggestive. Either way, there
is extra lookup (out of the cognitive task space) and a greater likelihood
of error than is really tenable. Unfortunately, that is mostly the state
of the art in open/COTS tools, but the way to fix it isn't to make the IDs
more suggestive (and conducive to error); it's to make the tools use the
human-oriented features of the language when interfacing with humans. BTW,
I specified state of the art in *COTS* tools, because I've seen a number
of proprietary tools, developed for use within an company only, that don't
make this same error. I'm perpetually frustrated that we don't have the
same level of tooling in the open-source or COTS worlds. But it is not a
coincidence that the companies in question have done well in developing
semantic enterprise or web systems with those ontologies as components.
They take their ontologies, and the processes concerning them, rather
seriously.
Yes. Fully agree here. In the example I cited, the
tooling was just atrocious, and better tools would have addressed the
problem.
I just don't think the solution is to treat the
ontology language as more impoverished than it really is. We know there is
far to go in improving tools, anyway. I'd say that one of the improvements
should be to make tools that use the existing support for co-existing
human-readability and machine-uniqueness.
--
(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,
_________________________________________________________________
Msg
Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe:
mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community
Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community
Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
--
(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
|
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (01)
|