Hi
Can you give a more detailed example of where you think having two
different meanings for foobar causes a problem when using RDF?
I do something similar regularly in RDF, without issue. At least I think
I do, but maybe I am misunderstanding you.
For example when querying I often write queries that contain something
like this
?x a Lorem
?x foobar ?y
In other words when querying I am explicit about my context.
graham
On 30/04/21 12:27 am, Laura Morales wrote:
I have problems with the fact that, in English, words can have multiple
meanings and can also be used as verbs, nouns, etc. In RDF, I feel like I'm
compelled to define a term and its one meaning that is unique across the entire
vocabulary. If I want to use the same term to mean two or more things, I have
to use two dictionaries or I have to come up with weird combinations of
multiple words. You know, like SimpleBeanFactoryAwareAspectInstanceFactory.
I was wondering if there is any way to define a term whose meaning depends on the
context. For example Lorem.foobar and Ipsum.foobar, "foobar" could mean two
entirely different things depending on whether it's a property of the type Lorem or type
Ipsum. AFAIK OWL defines domains/ranges for terms, so maybe these can be used for this
goal? What would be the practical implications, for example if I were to use Fuseki
without an OWL reasoner (ie. just by loading a bunch of triples and start querying with
SPARQL)?
--
Doubt is a pain too lonely to know that faith is his twin brother. - Kahlil
Gibran
