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

Re: Update on PROV-O OWL file (Action item 55)

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 20:08:44 +0000
Message-ID: <4F42A84C.5000901@ninebynine.org>
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
CC: Curt Tilmes <Curt.Tilmes@nasa.gov>, public-prov-wg@w3.org
I just added this comment to the wiki example:
[[
GK comment: this topic (uncertain times) has been discussed in the context of 
CIDOC CRM, and the discussion was quite involved. I think we need to avoid 
getting into the rathole of creating ontologies for uncertain time intervals, 
but provide something to which such work can be attached. In this case, the 
prov:Activity provides the placeholder, and we can duck the actual problem of 
how to represent the uncertain time interval. I think this is what the final 
example above is suggesting, except that I would see the time estimate property 
being applied to the prov:Activity resource rather than the prov:Entity. (E.g. 
what if we were trying to say Mona Lisa was created about 1503-1519, and touched 
up in some later period? Do we really want to contemplate new time-related 
properties for every possible activity type?
]]

#g
--

On 17/02/2012 15:08, Timothy Lebo wrote:
> Added example to
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_component_examples#The_MonaLisa_portrait_is_dated_to_circa_1503.E2.80.931519
>
> -tim
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2012, at 9:25 AM, Curt Tilmes wrote:
>
>> On 02/16/2012 05:04 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>>> On 16/02/12 21:36, Satya Sahoo wrote:
>>>> Also, I believe the DM supports representation of a simple provenance
>>>> assertion such as, "The MonaLisa portrait is dated to circa 15031519"
>>>> (MonaLisa portrait is an Entity).
>>>
>>> How would you do it? I don't know.
>>
>> Time is instantaneous, so you couldn't specify it as a generation
>> time, but could you just define a domain specific attribute for the
>> generation?
>>
>> wasGeneratedBy(ex:MonaLisa, [ex:creationEstimate="1503-1519"]);
>>
>> Is it ok to leave out both activity and time in order to specify
>> generation attributes?  DM would seem to allow it since everything but
>> entity is optional.
>>
>>
>> How would such a thing get mapped to RDF?
>>
>> ex:MonaLisa a prov:Entity .
>> _:a a prov:Activity .
>> _:g a prov:Generation .
>> ex:MonaLisa prov:wasGeneratedBy _:a .
>> _:a prov:hadQualifiedGeneration _:g .
>> _:g a prov:QualifiedInvolvement .
>> _:g prov:hadQualifiedEntity ex:MonaLisa .
>> _:g ex:creationEstimate "1503-1519" .
>>
>>
>> Probably easier to just express this outside PROV:
>>
>> ex:MonaLisa ex:creationEstimate "1503-1519" .
>>
>> Curt
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 20 February 2012 20:26:43 GMT

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