[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Ontologies and fuzzy set

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Ontologies and fuzzy set
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 23:49:56 -0400
• In-reply-to: <000a01c38c74$2b28e060$c801a8c0@DIDIERHOME>
• References: <000a01c38c74$2b28e060$c801a8c0@DIDIERHOME>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030901 Thunderbird/0.2

Didier PH Martin wrote:

> ... If this is the
> case, I am having tremendous difficulties to see where the linkage between
> the resource and its ontology is located? 

You are not alone in this.  There has been discussion of this just this 
past week on the RDF lists.  One camp wants all RDF resources to be 
indicated with a dereferenceable URL - the URL would provide information 
about the resource, somewhat like RDDL does.  Another camp is worried 
about confusing the abstract meaning of a URL with the dereferenced 
resource, and so thinks that no such URI should actually point to anything.

 > At the end of its namespace URI?
> If yes, the semantic web starts to be operational. A resource would then
> provide:
> a) A classification of its information units
> b) A reference to the model behind this classification.
> 
> Is there any talks in that direction?
> 

One thing that comes to mind is Patrick Stickler's URIQA approach

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003May/0137.html
http://www.intellidimension.com/default.rsp?topic=/pages/site/packages/uriqa/default.rsp

(unfortunately the Nokia server has been or is being moved and doe snot 
seem to work right now).

URIQA has two parts -

1) a new header for an HTTP request, to signal that special information 
is wanted about the resource

2) A subset of an RDF database - namely, all information known about the 
resource (where the resource is the subject of an RDF statement) - but 
only to a very limited depth.  Of course, this information is still in 
the form of RDF triples, but you could discover a resource's 
classification this way.

Topic Maps have the so-called Public Subject Indicator.  The author of a 
PSI description could discuss the classification scheme and the model in 
the referenced uri, but there is no standard way to make such 
descriptions machine-understandable at present.

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • About OWL syntax
    • From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>

• References:
  • RE: Ontologies and fuzzy set
    • From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>

• Prev by Date: MINDLab Semantic Technologies Tutorials Announcement - Nov 3-6, 2003
• Next by Date: Re: Is google a conceptual graph engine?
• Previous by thread: RE: Ontologies and fuzzy set
• Next by thread: About OWL syntax
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread