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

Re: Collections in PROV-O

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:30:13 -0500
Cc: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <31C2630E-EE65-4F5A-B482-2D82AB321A67@rpi.edu>
To: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>

On Feb 23, 2012, at 10:07 AM, Jun Zhao wrote:

> On 23/02/2012 14:59, Paolo Missier wrote:
>> 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 generic wasDerivedFrom relation 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,
> 
> I think I confused you.
> 
> I want to express two types of relationships between two entities, one of which is a collection of another:
> 
> 1/ the containment relationship between two entities, i.e A contained by B.
> 
> 2/ a derivation relationship. I don't need to express exactly which element was deleted or inserted. I believe the wasDerivedFrom helps me.
> 
> 
> But what about the simple containment relationship, like A is contained by B? I don't want to specify key, value things like that.
> 


:a prov:hadLocation :b .

:-)

It _used_ to include the notions of row/column, etc.  If it still does, then being in a set is like a location.
But the "geospatial" definition makes this less certain.

-Tim



> -- Jun
>> 
>> --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 Friday, 24 February 2012 04:30:53 GMT

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