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

Re: Roles (was: Testing the ontology for expressing workflow provenance)

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 09:38:40 +0100
Message-ID: <4E6B2210.7040909@ninebynine.org>
To: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
CC: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>, public-prov-wg@w3.org
I haven't been following this as closely as I should, but I think the 
alternative to specializing "used" may be similar to the CRM event-mediated 
approach whereby provenance information can be incorporated with data about 
things - extra metadata can easily be attached to an "observation" or 
"annotation" (or similar) event.

I think it's a good approach.

#g
--

On 09/09/2011 19:51, Daniel Garijo wrote:
> Hi Stian.
> In first place, thanks for your example. It is very helpful to get things to
> start moving.
> In second place, you are right: the ontology has not been updated yet with
> Satya's proposal
> for modeling roles. I think it is better than specializing the "used"
> property, since it allows
> adding additional information withouth transforming the "Used" property in a
> class (which is the
> way to model n-ary relationchips). If we just specialize the "used"
> property, then we won't be able to
> link the time of usage, the location of usage, or anything additional
> metadata.
>
> However, we are still discussing this approach, because it is true that when
> you don't know
> the role of the used entity, everything might get a bit confusing.
>
> You are welcome to join us on monday's telecons :)
>
> Best,
> Daniel
>
> 2011/9/9 Stian Soiland-Reyes<soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
>
>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:35, Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>>   <
>> http://ns.taverna.org.uk/2011/run/2613aab1-dfe9-4a17-a4be-7589f5d388d6/>
>>>     a  prov:ProcessExecution;
>>>          prov:used [
>>>              rdf:type
>>> <
>> http://ns.taverna.org.uk/2010/workflow/ea4168eb-67ea-440f-ab73-818da5efc998/processor/String_constant/out/value
>>>
>>>              prov:assumedBy
>>> <
>> http://ns.taverna.org.uk/2011/data/2613aab1-dfe9-4a17-a4be-7589f5d388d6/ref/153277f1-5e4f-43fc-968d-ab3a8b038676
>>>
>>> ;
>>
>> Note that I messed up the direction here - if something was 'used'
>> then the role should of course be an *input* port.  Just imagine
>> s/Output/Input/g for the whole thing as it is not possible to edit an
>> email once it's sent. :-)
>>
>>
>> (I wanted to do the discussion on 'used' rather than 'generated' - as
>> use can naturally occur in several roles in several process execution
>> - and indeed in several roles for the same execution)
>>
>> --
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
>> School of Computer Science
>> The University of Manchester
>>
>>
>
Received on Saturday, 10 September 2011 08:45:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:41 GMT