W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-comments@w3.org > September 2012

Fwd: suggested resolution ISSUE-503 (adopt plan)

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 21:40:36 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJCyKRoOdNNukZyh5qDv0ArkpkG2KCPx=f9gFsyUq2yF=pSR0A@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-prov-comments@w3.org
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 9:40 PM
Subject: suggested resolution ISSUE-503 (adopt plan)
To: "Freimuth, Robert, Ph.D." <Freimuth.Robert@mayo.edu>


Dear Robert

Thank you for your comment. Below is the suggested resolution. Please
let us know if you are fine with it. You can find any suggested
changes in the latest editor's draft at
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html

Thanks,
Paul

ISSUE-503 (adopt plan)

""Agents may adopt plans". Since plans are entities and agents are
related to entities through attribution, it follows that
"wasAdoptedBy" is an expanded relation specified by PROV. This
relation is missing from the spec."

Original email:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0093.html

Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/503

Group Response

- The expanded relationship wasAssociatedWith allows for plan to be
specified (plan attribute
http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#association.plan).

- It is not entirely clear what the semantics of the suggested
wasAdoptedBy would be:

    -- If it is a form of influence by which an agent was influenced
by a plan, this can be expressed by a subtype of derivation
wasDerivedFrom(ag,pl)

    -- Alternatively, if it is an influence of the plan by the agent,
this can be expressed by subtype of attribution wasAttributedTo(pl,ag)

    -- If it is not an influence, a given application could define, in
OWL terminology, a property chain wasAdoptedBy=agent o
inverse(hadPlan)

- The above discussion shows that PROV provides core building blocks
that allow a relation such as wasAdoptedBy to be defined.

- Hence, there is no need for a separate wasAdoptedBy relation.

Suggested change: Replace To illustrate expanded relations, we
consider the concept of association, described in Section 2.1.3. by To
illustrate expanded relations, we revisit the concept of association,
introduced in Section 2.1.3 (full definition of the expanded
association can be found in section 5.3.3).


-- 
--
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
- Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group |
  Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
- The Network Institute
VU University Amsterdam
Received on Thursday, 27 September 2012 19:41:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 27 September 2012 19:41:09 GMT