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

Re: complementOf -> viewOf: proposed text

From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:16:55 +0000
Message-ID: <4F15AD07.8030000@ncl.ac.uk>
To: "Myers, Jim" <MYERSJ4@rpi.edu>
CC: Paolo Missier <paolo.missier@newcastle.ac.uk>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Jim

(haven't read your latest email, except to spot that you disagree with transitivity, but I am not prepared to argue just now)

I think unless you are prepared to accept that they are different characterization of the same real-world thing, then they should 
not be alternates of each other. (at least) one of the two is not the customer in the red chair.

-Paolo

On 1/17/12 5:04 PM, Myers, Jim wrote:
> 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!
>
> --Paolo
>
>
> 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
> http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier
>
>


-- 
-----------  ~oo~  --------------
Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK
http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 17:17:23 UTC

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