W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > October 2011

PROV-ISSUE-125: derivation-attributes constraint (PROV-DM and PROV-O) [Data Model]

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 22:48:27 +0000
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1RFD1n-0007a4-3Q@barney.w3.org>

PROV-ISSUE-125: derivation-attributes constraint (PROV-DM and PROV-O) [Data Model]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/125

Raised by: Satya Sahoo
On product: Data Model

The following constraint (id=derivation-attributes) is defined for wasDerivedFrom Relation (in mercurial fpwd head PROV-DM document on Oct 15, 2011):

"Given a process execution expression denoted by pe, entity expressions denoted by e1 and e2, qualifiers q1 and q2, the assertion wasDerivedFrom(e2,e1,pe,q2,q1) or wasDerivedFrom(e2,e1) holds if and only if the values of some attributes of the entity expression identified by e2 are partly or fully determined by the values of some attributes of the entity expression identified by e1. "

Issue: 
a) This attribute-based constraint for wasDerivedFrom property can lead to ambiguous assertions of wasDerivedFrom between Entity instances.

Example scenario: The color attribute of an apple, kept in a refrigerator, "color = brown" is determined by the attribute of the refrigerator "temperature = -10C". Can we assert that "brown apple" wasDerivedFrom "refrigerator"?

We can argue that the "brown apple" dependedOn "refrigerator" with temperature setting of -10C, but not wasDerivedFrom

Suggestion: restate the above attribute-based constraint for "dependedOn" relation instead of "wasDerivedFrom"

b) Since dependedOn is a weaker notion of wasDerivedFrom - we can assert in the PROV-O that dependedOn is a parent property (more generic version) of wasDerivedFrom

c) Suggest renaming dependedOn to dependentOn
Received on Saturday, 15 October 2011 22:48:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:44 GMT