As someone who looked fairly deeply into owl:sameAs use, the problem is not fatal but is endemic. Nonetheless about 1/3 of the sameAs usages are actually more or less similarity and better handled by statistics. The rest require likely domain specific predicates. Logic and the world do not layer easily. I am certain the problem of 'owl:butReallySameAs' would inherit the same issues. Nonetheless more research is needed. On Apr 1, 2016 10:07 AM, "Aldo Gangemi" <aldo.gang...@cnr.it> wrote:
> Hi, I think you are just noticing the effects of real life when logic gets > actually used. All predicates can get misused, because their semantics > cannot be just syntactically checked, it depends on the intentions and > practices of modellers and users of applications. > > On the other hand, there are already other predicates that can be used, > such as rdfs:seeAlso, skos:closeMatch, etc., let alone probabilistic and > fuzzy varieties of OWL for reasoning in presence of uncertainties of > various kinds. > > I’d rather keep the problem of creating vocabularies separate from that of > cleaning up existing data. The second can be done for specific needs (see > e.g. a recent paper by Heiko Paulheim and myself on scalable DBpedia > cleanup [1]), while the dream of a global consistent semantic web is > unsustainable, owl:sameAs or anything not the same of a different sameness > :) > > Ciao > Aldo > > [http://www.heikopaulheim.com/docs/iswc2015.pdf] > > > On 01 Apr 2016, at 15:32, Henry Story <henry.st...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli <i...@csarven.ca> wrote: > >> > >> There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at > this point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud. > >> > >> The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a > massive sweep of the LOD cloud and adopt owl:sameSameButDifferent. > >> > >> I think the terminology is human-friendly enough that there will be > minimal confusion down the line, but for the the pedants among us, we can > define it along the lines of: > >> > >> > >> The built-in OWL property owl:sameSameButDifferent links things to > things. Such an owl:sameSameButDifferent statement indicates that two URI > references actually refer to the same thing but may be different under some > circumstances. > > > > What you need is mereologial logic so that you can start speaking of > things overlapping, being mostly the same, etc... > > See Slide 26 of Jim Hendler's talk ( and the whole set of slides) > > "On Beyond OWL: challenges for ontologies on the Web" > > > > > http://www.slideshare.net/jahendler/on-beyond-owl-challenges-for-ontologies-on-the-web > > > > > >> > >> > >> Thoughts? > >> > >> [1] https://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws21 > >> [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts#terms_sameAs > >> [3] http://schema.org/sameAs > >> > >> -Sarven > >> http://csarven.ca/#i > >> > > > > > > >
