- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:53:35 -0500
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Stephan, Previous changes on hadTemporalExtent (becoming occurredAt) + changes: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/diff/601fe1fa5bfd/ontology/ProvenanceOntology.owl and http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/diff/f39e3afc55b5/ontology/ProvenanceOntology.owl and http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/diff/201e6e6d9cbf/ontology/ProvenanceOntology.owl should be close to your request. I'm open to name suggestions for the domain of hadTemporalExtent (currently, Durable). Activities are a subclass of Durable. I'm changing this issue to pending review. -Tim On Feb 22, 2012, at 1:06 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-259: hadTemporalExtent domain and range [Ontology] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/259 > > Raised by: Stephan Zednik > On product: Ontology > > hadTemporalExtent has rdfs:domain prov:Involvement, which means if anything has a prov:hadTemporalExtent that it will be inferred to be a member of the class prov:Involvement. > > Since a temporal extent describes the time (interval or instant) over which something occurred, I would prefer to not restrict the class of things with temporal extent to Involvement. For example, I think it would make sense in practice for Activities to use hadTemporalExtent. > > Also, I would like the range of hadTemporalExtent to be relaxed to include both TimeInstant and intervals of time (which we currently do not model in prov-o). In OWL-Time this would be time:TemporalEntity (union of time:Instant and time:Interval). > > --Stephan > > > > >
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 05:54:05 UTC