W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > February 2012

PROV-O ontology comments

From: Simon Miles <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:18:55 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKc1nHfhd-OmVbNw185miWGYv=HiUXhtyqb5_KX462YpphzJBw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hello PROV-O team,

Here's my quick review of the PROV-O ontology, as requested last telecon.

In general, it seems fine.

It seems odd that hadLocation has a domain of owl:Thing. So what is
it's connection to provenance?

What does it mean that hasAnnotation does not have a specified domain
(my ignorance of RDFS)? If it means that it applies to anything, then
what is the distinction between using hasAnnotation and just giving an
arbitrary non-prov RDF statement? What is its connection to
provenance?

The old W3C 2006 Time namespace is still used/included. Is use of this
ontology to be removed in the next revision?

I notice that comments (at least for adoptedPlan) still refer to
ProcessExecution.

Thanks,
Simon

-- 
Dr Simon Miles
Lecturer, Department of Informatics
Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
+44 (0)20 7848 1166

Efficient Multi-Granularity Service Composition:
http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1396/
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2012 11:19:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:56 GMT