Comments on: All I know about RDF/OWL I learned in preschool http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/246 IT management in a changing IT world Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:31:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: William Vambenepe’s blog » Blog Archive » First in-depth look at Microsoft’s Oslo and the “M” modeling language http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/246#comment-53714 William Vambenepe’s blog » Blog Archive » First in-depth look at Microsoft’s Oslo and the “M” modeling language Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:03:51 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=246#comment-53714 [...] when you grow up”). As such, you can be of several types at the same time. Refined types are potatoes inside potatoes (not sure if “M” supports definition of types as unions and/or intersection of existing [...] [...] when you grow up”). As such, you can be of several types at the same time. Refined types are potatoes inside potatoes (not sure if “M” supports definition of types as unions and/or intersection of existing [...]

]]> By: Stu http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/246#comment-49900 Stu Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:45:22 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=246#comment-49900 One thing that I fear will eternally confound OO folks is that their version of inheritance leads to odd results, like Ellipses inheriting from Circles, instead of the other way around. Whereas OWL's notion of "type inheritance" is really about constraints (like sets). Which leads to the bigger deal for everyone: the open world assumption. You get into some weird results when you think in terms of "type checking" being a way to prevent you from doing bad things. In OWL, its just about enabling inference. Except for blatant non-satisfiability, you'll need a pile of SPARQL queries (for example) to actually do your validation and constraint checking on inputs if you want to prevent someone from adding adding problem triples to a particular graph. There are other things that are odd about this world, like non-unique-names, and graph provenance, but I think there are reasonable analogies in the OO world to these things. It's about time we took this technology for a real spin on the enterprise road.... One thing that I fear will eternally confound OO folks is that their version of inheritance leads to odd results, like Ellipses inheriting from Circles, instead of the other way around. Whereas OWL’s notion of “type inheritance” is really about constraints (like sets).

Which leads to the bigger deal for everyone: the open world assumption. You get into some weird results when you think in terms of “type checking” being a way to prevent you from doing bad things. In OWL, its just about enabling inference. Except for blatant non-satisfiability, you’ll need a pile of SPARQL queries (for example) to actually do your validation and constraint checking on inputs if you want to prevent someone from adding adding problem triples to a particular graph.

There are other things that are odd about this world, like non-unique-names, and graph provenance, but I think there are reasonable analogies in the OO world to these things. It’s about time we took this technology for a real spin on the enterprise road….

]]> By: William Vambenepe http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/246#comment-49822 William Vambenepe Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:43:16 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=246#comment-49822 Yes Beril, they are indeed <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venn_diagram" rel="nofollow">Venn diagrams</a>. But that's not how we called them in preschool. I still like to think of them as "potatoes" because, while a lot of the discussions around the semantic web focus on its complexity, I like to remember the simplicity of its principles. BTW, you're not going to hell, you are there already... ;-) Yes Beril, they are indeed Venn diagrams. But that’s not how we called them in preschool. I still like to think of them as “potatoes” because, while a lot of the discussions around the semantic web focus on its complexity, I like to remember the simplicity of its principles.

BTW, you’re not going to hell, you are there already… ;-)

]]> By: Beril the Dwarf http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/246#comment-49806 Beril the Dwarf Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:16:12 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=246#comment-49806 I've always heard them referred to as Venn Diagrams. Though, I thought I was pretty slick in preschool and we never did any of that- not that I can remember nyway. Whats wrong with multiple inheritance, anyway? It's one of those things that makes OO programming interesting... [I'm going to hell, aren't I?] I’ve always heard them referred to as Venn Diagrams. Though, I thought I was pretty slick in preschool and we never did any of that- not that I can remember nyway.

Whats wrong with multiple inheritance, anyway? It’s one of those things that makes OO programming interesting… [I'm going to hell, aren't I?]

]]>