On 3/15/13 2:02 PM, Umutcan ŞİMŞEK wrote:
Thanks for the quick answer : )So this issue is that subjective for contexts which allows to use owl:sameAs to link resources if they are not semantically even a little bit related in real world?
Of course not. The problem is that you come to a point where equivalence claims are utterly blurred by context. It a semantic resolution kind of thing.
The way I've always addressed this problem is by encouraging folks to put this kinds of claims in dedicated named graphs. Then you have the ability to negate or include. In addition, at least with Virtuoso (the product I oversee), you can apply owl:sameAs reasoning conditionally.
Ultimately, this whole thing has to be "horses for courses" compliant :-) Kingsley
Sorry if I'm asking too basic questions. I'm still a rookie at this :D Umutcan On 15-03-2013 19:38, Kingsley Idehen wrote:On 3/15/13 1:05 PM, Umutcan ŞİMŞEK wrote:My question is, does LODD use owl:sameAs properly? For instance, are those two resources, dbpedia:Metamizole and drugbank:DB04817 (code for Metamizole), really identical? Or am I getting the word "property" in the paper wrong?The question is always about: do those URIs denote the same thing? Put differently, do the two URIs have a common referent?## Turtle ## <#i> owl:sameAs <#you>. ## End ##That's a relation in the form of a 3-tuple based statement that carries entailment consequences for a reasoner that understand the relation semantics. Through some "context lenses" the statement above could be accurate, in others totally inaccurate.Conclusion, beauty lies eternally in the eyes of the beholder :-)
-- 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
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
