Re: prov-o example relations

Hi all,
James Cheney proposed the following example (paraphrased from his original
mail) to compare the current approach of PROV-O in modeling roles with the
approach used in the OPM OWL Ontology [1]:

------------------
"P is a ProcessExecution that "uses" 40 and 5, and divides them to get 8.
40 is a numerator and 5 is a denominator. The same entity/thing could have
different roles with respect to different processes. For e.g.
(a) 40 / 5 = 8 by PE p1

(b) 8 / 2 = 4 by PE p2,

where 8 plays the roles of "result" and "numerator" respectively.
-------------------

After some discussion among the ontology group, I have created two diagrams
(attached) that illustrate how the above example will be modeled as RDF
(corresponding to an PROV-O schema modeled in RDFS,  OWL):
1. OPMO-approach-Classes.jpg - models n-ary properties as classes (e.g
Usage, Generation in the diagram) similar to the OPM OWL ontology [1] and
also has a Role class.

2. EntityInRole-approach-Classes.jpg - illustrates the current approach in
PROV-O using the EntityInRole class.

We will be reviewing these two approaches during our ontology telcon
tomorrow at US 12:00noon ET. We will use the:

Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference 695 ("OWL")
and the regular provenance WG irc (#prov http://irc.w3.org/?channels=prov).


Thanks.

Best,
Satya


[1] http://openprovenance.org/model/opmo


On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu> wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> We are having some discussions in the ontology group using an example from
> James illustrating the encoding using n-ary property as classes and using
> the EntityInRole class. I will share the encodings tomorrow.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best,
> Satya
>
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:
>
>> Hi Satya, and PROV-O team,
>>
>> It would be great for the working group to be able to review the proposed
>> encodings of the used/generatedBy relations before Monday's call as it
>> would allow those that can't take part on the call to comment ahead of it.
>>
>> Is it possible to have them by Sunday?
>>
>> I know it's the weekend but it would be really helpful.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Paul
>>
>>
>