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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-90 (namespace-in-ontology): Namespace used in ontology [Formal Model]

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:29:51 +0200
Message-ID: <4EA0305F.8080805@vu.nl>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Actually, you're right. It doesn't define a namespace in terms of urls.

Paul


Graham Klyne wrote:
> Is there any particular reason that PROV-DM needs to define a namespace URI?
>
> Doesn't the material there all stand on the abstract syntax model, which doesn't
> depend on URI-based namespaces?
>
> Just asking.
>
> #g
> --
>
>
> On 20/10/2011 14:38, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 14:10, Paul Groth<p.t.groth@vu.nl>   wrote:
>>> I think it's as you suggest. We may need extra namespace for anything that's
>>> not in the datamodel.
>> W3 guys - is it OK to delay deciding on this until after we've made
>> the first public draft of the ontology?
>>
>>
>> Should we have aliases in PROV-O for the matching ones? How would
>> users remember/know which term is from which namespace?
>>
>> # Example of aliasing
>> @prefix prov http://www.w3.org/ns/prov/ .
>> @prefix provo http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/ .
>> # ..
>>
>> provo:Entity owl:sameAs prov:Entity .
>> provo:ProcessExecution owl:sameAs prov:ProcessExecution .
>> # ...
>>
>> prov:Entity a owl:Class .
>> prov:ProcessExecution a owl:Class .
>> # ..
>>
>> # only in provo:
>> provo:EntityInRole a owl:Class ;
>>     rdfs:subPropertyOf provo:Entity .
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2011 14:33:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:46 GMT