Hi David,
I would like to join your initiative.
I'm an MD immersed in SemWeb technology.
For 4 years I was a member of the research group ACA (Advanced Clinical
Applications) in AGFA.
I'm familiar with creating RDF/S-OWL ontologies, N3 rules, machine reasoning.
Currently I work at Roche, dealing
Yes, mostly. I'm also trying to adhere to the ideal of having the semweb
assertions being a monotonically increasing set. At the moment the
semantics of the reasoning tools assume monotonicity. For an example of the
problem, consider a resource which makes inferences based on assertions
other make.
Ah, got it. I was creating the same problem that you were attempting
to fix: You want to make it impossible to add an inconsistent
assertion in the case that the license is initially unknown but is
determined later by building the safe guard into the property. That
seems reasonable enough.. althoug
The problems with that is that it typically isn't so easy to find the
license information at the organization site, and that the license
information isn't programmatically accessible since most organizations are
not serving interoperable RDF.
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Joachim Baran
wrote
Hi!
I prefer the approach of having a predicate that points to the
organization/institute/etc. that will know about the exact licensing terms.
That way it is possible to search for datasets whose licenses are "not
known," i.e., where it would be necessary to contact said
organization/institut
The reason I labeled it tried-to-determine-license is that that way the
assertion remains true. If the predicate is whether we *have* determined
license then the assertion needs to be retracted when we do. When possible
we try to make statements that remain true.
When probing for a license, first
Just a slight tweak to Alan's suggestion (thanks Alan):
:determined-license "true"^xsd:Boolean
-Scott
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Alan Ruttenberg
wrote:
> I concur. This is clear from the semantics of OWL. Understand the difference
> between integrity constraints and OWL assertions.
>
> If
I concur. This is clear from the semantics of OWL. Understand the
difference between integrity constraints and OWL assertions.
If you want to say that there was an attempt to find a license and that it
couldn't be found, say that. You could do so as an annotation on the axiom,
or as a distinct pro
[apologies for cross-posting]
3rd International Workshop on Ordering and Reasoning (OrdRing2014)
October 19th/20th, 2014 - Riva del Garda, Trentino, Italy
Co-located with the 13th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2014)
http://www.streamreasoning.org/events/ordring2014
NEWS
--
