[Person-ontology] first contributions - is the Higgins top-level useful?

[David Whitten]

On 10/9/07, Paul Trevithick <paul at socialphysics.org> wrote:
>
> If we just use a triple "Adam hasHairColor blonde" where blonde is a
> literal, we've no ability to make statements about the value "blonde". So
> what we do in Higgins is use two triples shown loosely here:
>
>    Adam hasHairColor value1
>    value1 value "blonde"
>    value1 expires "Jan 1, 2010"
>    value1 source "Dept of Motor Vehicles"
>
> Where "value1" is a subclass of Value (probably StringValue, to be
> precise).



Naively, I  wonder what you mean by value1 expires "Jan 1, 2010"
does the blonde-ness of Adam's hair expire?

If you mean that the hair color information is known to be good on Jan 1,
2010, good for you,
but I find even that confusing.

In general, this seems like some categorial error of talking about a value
having an expiration date.
The best I can assume from this snippet is that Adam's driver's license is
expiring in Jan 1, 2010
which is totally different...

David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://idcommons.net/pipermail/person-ontology/attachments/20071009/84abfe97/attachment.htm