Hi Tim,
One more question on the proposal. How do you propose to handle
derivation such as:
wasDerivedFrom(e4,e2,pe2,qualifier(ex:port=smtp,
ex:section="attachment"),qualifier(ex:fct="attach"))?
The reason why we introduced the use qualifier and the generation
qualifier is that we had
no identifiers for them. If we have identifiers for these qualified
involvements, we would
have this kind of derivation record:
wasDerivedFrom(e4,e2,pe2,genId,useId)
Luc
On 06/11/11 22:07, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>
> On Nov 6, 2011, at 4:00 PM, Satya Sahoo wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> The following is the agenda for our ontology telcon tomorrow at
>> 12:00noon US EST (please note the corresponding time in Europe):
>>
>> 1. Review the OPMO-based solution for modeling role information in
>> PROV-O OWL and the instantiation as RDF using James's "division
>> example" (Tim, Daniel, Stephan)
>
>
> Writeup is at
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Qualifed_Involvements_in_PROV-O
>
>
>>
>> 2. Review the modified html document - (a) examples for
>> wasRevisionOf, Recipe etc. (b) classes in "holding section", (c)
>> properties in "holding section"
>>
>> 3. Review new section in html document - Mapping PROV-DM to PROV-O
>>
>> 4. Discuss proposal for simplifying the PROV-O for readers/users by
>> re-structuring some of the properties in a "core" and an "extended" model
>
> For this, I'd like to remind the group about
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_components
> I'd also like to get acknowledgement that this can or will be used as
> we move forward.
>
>>
>> 5. Discuss addition of diagrams for some of the object properties
>>
>> We will use the Zakim bridge for the call +1.617.761.6200
>> <tel:+1.617.761.6200>, conference 695 ("OWL") and the titanpad for
>> taking notes (Tim, can you please send out the link to the titanpad?)
>
> -Tim
>