On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Dan Brickley <dan...@danbri.org> wrote:
> On 23/6/09 11:01, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: > > And Michael, please be frank - there is a tendency in the LOD community >> which goes along the lines of "OWL and DL-minded SW research has proven >> obsolete anyway, so we LOD guys and girls just pick and use the bits and >> pieces we like and don't care about the rest". >> > > What made the Web so powerful is that its Architecture is extremely >> well-thought underneath the first cover of simplicity. >> > > One of those principles is partial understanding - the ability to do > something useful without understanding everything... > Absolutely. We should also remember that multiple ontologies may exist that cover a given term. I think this is often forgotten. There is no requirement that the ontology statements retrieved by dereferencing the URI should be used - they are only provided as _an_ additional source of information. There may be many other ways to discover relevant ontologies and a large class of those will be for private use. If I choose to assert that dc:date and rev:createdOn are owl:equivalentProperties then that is my prerogative. The beauty of the semweb is that I can publish my assertions and potentially other people could choose to adopt them. Ian