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

RE: PROV-ISSUE-95 (Recipes as Classes): Recipes as classes? [Conceptual Model]

From: Myers, Jim <MYERSJ4@rpi.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:17:37 +0000
To: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3131E7DF4CD2D94287870F5A931EFC23030D3A@EX14MB2.win.rpi.edu>
This seems to imply that an event is an instance of class: plan and the individual plans are instances of class: plan. In this case when I say individual plan I'm talking about something like the workflow template - a definition of the generic process versus an event where both the generic and parameterized inputs are all defined and can only occur once. Do you want the workflow template and event to both be instances of the same class?

Jim

From: Jim McCusker [mailto:mccusj@rpi.edu]
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:40 PM
To: Myers, Jim
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG
Subject: Re: PROV-ISSUE-95 (Recipes as Classes): Recipes as classes? [Conceptual Model]

 I was saying that an event that follows a recipe/plan is an instance of that recipe/plan. The URI for a plan can be used two ways in OWL 2: as an individual (the description of the plan, such as components, parameters, whatnot), and as a class (defining members of the set, formally defining what is used in a plan).

Note: I find myself avoiding saying recipe because, while it's specific, it just doesn't sound right. Plan might be specific enough while covering other usages that recipe normally wouldn't be used for.

Jim
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Myers, Jim <MYERSJ4@rpi.edu<mailto:MYERSJ4@rpi.edu>> wrote:
??? Sorry -not sure I understand your comment - I was saying that while PEs are instances of some class (process), I didn't think it could recipe since instances of that class would be files, not PEs. Are you agreeing/disagreeing/re-framing?

Jim

From: Jim McCusker [mailto:mccusj@rpi.edu<mailto:mccusj@rpi.edu>]
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 12:02 PM
To: Myers, Jim
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG
Subject: Re: PROV-ISSUE-95 (Recipes as Classes): Recipes as classes? [Conceptual Model]

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Myers, Jim <MYERSJ4@rpi.edu<mailto:MYERSJ4@rpi.edu>> wrote:
We had discussions earlier about the idea that a PE was an instance of a process which has a recipe and then decided that we could just represent PE hasRecipe R without realizing the process itself in the model. I don't have an opinion about the decision but I bring it up because I think process would be the right thing to be the class for a PE instance, not recipe. One type of instance of a recipe could be a file (text, workflow description, etc.) - a PE wouldn't be an instance of a recipe, but could be an instance of the process the recipe describes.

I think that's where the punning comes in. When treated as an individual, the recipe is the plan. When treated as a class, it is the group of things that conform to that plan.

Jim
--
Jim McCusker
Programmer Analyst
Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
Yale School of Medicine
james.mccusker@yale.edu<mailto:james.mccusker@yale.edu> | (203) 785-6330<tel:%28203%29%20785-6330>
http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu

PhD Student
Tetherless World Constellation
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
mccusj@cs.rpi.edu<mailto:mccusj@cs.rpi.edu>
http://tw.rpi.edu



--
Jim McCusker
Programmer Analyst
Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
Yale School of Medicine
james.mccusker@yale.edu<mailto:james.mccusker@yale.edu> | (203) 785-6330
http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu

PhD Student
Tetherless World Constellation
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
mccusj@cs.rpi.edu<mailto:mccusj@cs.rpi.edu>
http://tw.rpi.edu
Received on Thursday, 15 September 2011 18:18:38 GMT

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