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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-96 (entities and roles): Relating Roled Entities with non-Roled Entities [Conceptual Model]

From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:46:33 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|f08abe4da19560431d6b80bde4a6a840n8MDlK08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4E7C7FA9.5050908@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org

Hi James,

I see three different ways we can tackle your issue in PROV-DM.

Within one account, an identifier has a unique interpretation.
Hence, if multiple entity expressions have the same identifier, one
needs to take the union of them.

This account

account(acc,
         asserter,
     entity(http://x.com/James,[])
     entity(http://x.com/James,[role="FirstAuthor"]))

is equivalent to:


account(acc,
         asserter,
     entity(http://x.com/James,[role="FirstAuthor"]))


Hence, with a single account, and a single uri, you can't express two 
different entity expressions.


Alternatively, within a single account, you can use two different 
identifiers.
You can then express the wasComplementOf relation.


account(acc,
         asserter,
     entity(http://x.com/James,[colour="blue"])
     entity(http://x.com/James2,[role="FirstAuthor"])
     wasComplementOf(http://x.com/James,http://x.com/James2))



In the third option, you use two accounts.  In each account, you are
entitled to use the same uri to denote different entity expressions.


account(http://p.com/acc1,
         asserter1,
     entity(http://x.com/James,[colour="blue"]))


account(http://p.com/acc2,
         asserter2,
     entity(http://x.com/James,[role="FirstAuthor"]))

The account construct therefore acts as a scope distinguishing the two 
entities.

To express the wasComplementOf relation, you then need a form of
qualified identifier that involves the accounts ursi.

account(acc3,
         asserter3,

     wasComplementOf(   (http://p.com/acc1,  http://x.com/James)
                        (http://p.com/acc2,  http://x.com/James) ))

This last construct is not defined in the document.
We are planning to introduce qualified identifiers in the next iteration.

Cheers,
Luc

On 15/09/2011 18:46, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-96 (entities and roles): Relating Roled Entities with non-Roled Entities [Conceptual Model]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/96
>
> Raised by: James McCusker
> On product: Conceptual Model
>
> Let's say we have Entities "Jim McCusker" and "Jim McCusker as first author of XYZ paper". Under the current proposal, "Jim McCusker as first author of XYZ paper" is of type Entity and also of type FirstAuthor, which is a subclass of Entity and is therefore a Role. Since "Jim McCusker as first author of XYZ paper" is contextualized by that role, it's not correct for that to share the same URI as "Jim McCusker". However, there is some sort of relationship.
>
> I'd like to propose that complementOf, or whatever succeeds it, is that relationship. It follows the same pattern of "same entity in different contexts", as the role is a particular non-temporal, non-spatial contextualization.
>
>
>
>    
Received on Friday, 23 September 2011 12:47:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:42 GMT