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

Re: Collections in PROV-O

From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:59:04 +0000
Message-ID: <4F465438.4030601@ncl.ac.uk>
To: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Jun

You can just use derivation for that, right?
something to that effect is stated in DM sec.6.8:

" In general, all assertions reflect the asserter's partial knowledge of a sequence of data transformation events. In the particular 
case of collection evolution, in which the asserter/knows/that some of the state changes may have been missed, then the more 
genericwasDerivedFromrelation should be used to signal that some updates may have occurred, which cannot be precisely asserted as 
insertions or removals."

does that address your point?

--Paolo




On 2/23/12 2:47 PM, Jun Zhao wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> What if people don't have key-value pair for their collection structure?
> Instead, they just want to simply express that one entity is contained
> by another, like what we have in the Provenance Vocabulary:
>
> A prv:containedBy B .
>
> Can we express that in prov-o?
>
> I don't need to express what element was deleted or inserted. I just
> want to express a containment and derivation relationship.
>
> Can I do that?
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Jun
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2012 14:59:30 GMT

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