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

RE: complementOf -> viewOf: proposed text

From: Myers, Jim <MYERSJ4@rpi.edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:04:40 +0000
To: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
CC: Paolo Missier <paolo.missier@newcastle.ac.uk>, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3131E7DF4CD2D94287870F5A931EFC2302A52A21@EX14MB2.win.rpi.edu>
Which one do you claim is wrong? Or do you think that paolo-in-cafe and stian-in-cafe are still alternates?

  -- Jim
From: Paolo Missier [Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 11:37 AM
To: Stian Soiland-Reyes
Cc: Paolo Missier; Luc Moreau; public-prov-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: complementOf -> viewOf: proposed text

Hi Stian,

but really,  alternateOf() is designed /precisely/ to provide to say that e1, e2, are different characterizations of the /same thing/.

So if you assert

alternateOf(paoloInCafe, customerOnRedChair)

then you are indeed saying that they are the same thing, only using different characterizations.
And if you then also assert that

alternateOf(stianInCafe, customerOnRedChair)

then inferring that

alternateOf(paoloInCafe, stianInCafe)

is exactly what you want. If they are meant to be different things in the world, then one of the two assertions should not be there
in the first place, right?

I hope we can agree on this!


On 1/17/12 3:14 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 14:31, Paolo Missier<Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>  wrote:
>> I think of alternateOf as non-functional and transitive, which gives us
>> "clusters of alternates". We may later decide that it is convenient to add
>> properties that make a set of alternates into a lattice.
> No, not transitive.
> entity(customerOnRedChair, [prov:location="the red chair in the cafe"])
> entity(paoloInCafe)
> entity(stianInCafe)
> entity(paolo)
> entity(stian)
> specializationOf(paoloInCafe, paolo)
> specializationOf(stianInCafe, stian)
> alternateOf(paoloInCafe, customerOnRedChair)
> alternateOf(stianInCafe, customerOnRedChair)
> but we probably don't want to then infer:
> alternateOf(paoloInCafe, stianInCafe)
> and certainly not:
> alternateOf(paolo, stian)
> .. neither did overlap the old characterisation intervals, and are
> different 'things' in the world.
> however, if Paolo and Stian did not sit anywhere else but in the red
> chair, we can also have:
> specializationOf(paoloInCafe,
> customerOnRedChair)specializationOf(stianInCafe, customerOnRedChair)
> this implies that for the duration of paoloInCafe, it was also
> customerOnRedChair.

-----------  ~oo~  --------------
Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 17:05:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:11 UTC