Re: Typing: was Re: DBpedia as possible project

Hi Alexander,

[...]
> So the question becomes; can we still rely on our TM way of subject
> identification? I'm not so sure. Things change. And here's the catch;
[...]

That's an interesting question.

If someone tells me about penguins and says that penguins are birds, I
might be tempted to state:

   %prefix ex <http://psi.example.org/>

   ex:penguin isa ex:bird.

and I guess everybody agrees with that statement without ever looking
at <http://psi.example.org/penguin> or <http://psi.example.org/bird>.

The problem is that <http://psi.example.org/bird> defines "bird" as

    """
    Useless creatures nobody likes.
    """

Even if <http://psi.example.org/bird> is more gentle and states:

   """
   An animal which has wings to fly.
   """

we may have a problem: A penguin has wings. But it cannot fly in a
sense that you should be afraid that a penguin shits on your head. But
I might not know that penguins are more gentle than gulls and agree.

And even if I know that the possibility that a penguin shits on me is
rather low, I might interpret "flying" as "flying through the water"
since I am in a poetical mood. But "flying" is commonly be associated
with "being up in the air". Who's right?

... now we're far away from the initial topic map announcement, I
guess ...

Best regards,
Lars
-- 
Semagia 
<http://www.semagia.com>

<http://www.topicmaps.de/mailinglist/> German Topic Maps mailing list
<http://tinytim.sourceforge.net/> Open Source Topic Maps engine
<http://mappa.semagia.com/> Mappa - Python Topic Maps engine