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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-104 (time-class): How to relate start/end time to PE, use, generation, etc [Formal Model]

From: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:13:20 +0100
Message-ID: <4E9C4610.6000801@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
CC: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On 30/09/2011 11:06, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> But what is the point of introducing prov:Time and prov:Location
> classes if they have no properties and no relation to anything else in
> the ontology?

So they can be used as placeholder superclasses for generic applications that 
process and/or present provenance data without necessarily understanding the 
specific application-specific descriptions of time and/or location used?

For example, a generic application could display rdfs:label/rdfs:description 
values associated with a generic time/location class without knowing how to 
process the specific associated values.


> If it's out of scope, but we still want to say something rough about
> it, we should at least introduce a proper anchoring point, like we are
> (trying to) do with Role. If not then we should leave it out
> completely. (Which I would not personally like, because asserting when
> something happened is a quite crucial part of provenance - when its
> known).
> For reference, here are some time/event ontologies:
> http://motools.sourceforge.net/timeline/timeline.html
> http://motools.sourceforge.net/event/event.html
> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/
Received on Monday, 17 October 2011 17:49:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:10 UTC