Knowledge Representation and Formal Ontology Final Project
Graduation School of Library and Information Science
But what is a resource?
"A resource can be anything that has identity. Familiar examples include an electronic document, an image, a service (e.g., "today's weather report for Los Angeles"), and a collection of other resources. Not all resources are network "retrievable"; e.g., human beings, corporations, and bound books in a library can also be considered resources."
"The resource is the conceptual mapping to an entity or set of entities, not necessarily the entity which corresponds to that mapping at any particular instance in time. Thus, a resource can remain constant even when its content---the entities to which it currently corresponds---changes over time, provided that the conceptual mapping is not changed in the process."
W3C semantic web activity basically dodges this - resources are things that can be identified by a URI. "Things that have identity" doesn't tell us much.
But I don't want to talk about real life people that are identified by a URI/URL string, although perhaps what we discover here will apply or be related to those discussions as well.
Limiting this discussion to web resources - pages, sites, documents, web applications, web services.
Simplest case is a static page of HTML
But many of the web resources we care about are not static pages
Even static pages are often not really static
Moving away from current technology and implementation to what is fundamentally going on
Can we create a reasonable ontology for what's going on here?
Resource from an "instance" of that resource
Instance is an access of a resource in a particular context
What is necessary to include in a context? (What is a context?)
Distinguish resources from the "sources" that comprise and inform that resource
Mixed and often contradictory or ambiguous vocabulary in this domain
What level of abstraction are we working on?
What kind of question do we want to be able to answer?
Although, it may be useful to ontologize regardless of intended use just for a better understanding of this domain. (This as academia, after all.)
(Will indubitably have serious problems)
...things with identity?
...the higher level abstract thing that that a set of instances belongs to
...the conceptual mapping of a "concept" to a set of other entities (accesses, instances?)
...a resource may just have to a primitive abstract thing (like work)
corresponding to "program / display logic" part of original diagram
can we distinguish a resource from this mapping? (I think so)
Instances are also sets of assertions
These instances are dependent on:
Do resources intrinsically have identities?
If the sources change, we still have the same resource, says TBL (and me)
What if the mapping function changes?
Honestly, I'm not sure.
r is a static resource iff
∀c ResourceAccess(r,c) = i
May need the concept of a valid domain of contexts for a resource
Does a source inform / effect a resource?
Does a resource depend on a source?
For resource r and source s
If ∃ c1 and c2 s.t. c1 and c2 are within the domain of r
and c1, c2 differ only in s value (or presence)
ResourceAccess(r, c1) = i1
ResourceAccess(r, c2) = i2
s.t i1 and i2 are not equal, then r depends on s / s informs r.
(Or maybe simplified to ∃ c s.t. s belongs to c and c is in the domain of r)