[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xdi] reactions on paper "When owl:sameAs isn?t the Same..."
From my standpoint I've always thought of the XDI synonym
dollar word, which is now $is, as mapping to owl:sameAs. I briefly thought it
might be better to map to something a little weaker, skos:closeMatch, but came
back around to believing it should map to owl:sameAs. Another reason I think
h:correlation couldn't map to $is is that h:correlation is specifically not
a transitive property according to the Higgins XDI Harmonization wiki,
whereas $is must be.
Bill
From: Paul Trevithick [mailto:ptrevithick@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:15 PM To: Giovanni Bartolomeo Cc: OASIS - XDI TC Subject: Re: [xdi] reactions on paper "When owl:sameAs isn?t the Same..." Giovanni,
Last week it was proposed that h:correlation is the same as $is, but on
further reflection I don't think that's right. I think $is is
equivalent in semantics to owl:sameAs. Joseph and I discussed this a bit today
on the XDI harmonization portion of the weekly Higgins call. In Higgins
h:correlation means: representing the same thing in different contexts. The
following para is copied from [1] (BTW, we use the term entity instead of
resource):
On Jun 24, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Giovanni Bartolomeo wrote: Hello, |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]