Re: prov:Dictionary example - without the specs

 
On Jun 5, 2012, at 5:34 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:

> The only membership defined in dm is:
> 
> Membership	memberOf(c, {(key_1, e_1), ..., (key_n, e_n)})
> 
> Why should we define membership on collections?
> 
> 


Because we defined Collection?
"A collection is an entity that provides a structure to some constituents, which are themselves entities. These constituents are said to be member of the collections. "

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#term-collection

-Tim





> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science
> University of Southampton 
> Southampton SO17 1BJ
> United Kingdom
> 
> On 5 Jun 2012, at 22:29, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 5:26 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> 
>>> Dictionary keys can be compared. Hence, after insertion and removal, we can always determine a new dictionary state if we knew the state before operation.
>> 
>> 
>> okay. But why should that prevent someone from asserting that an Entity is a member of a Collection?
>> I feel like your "we can't assume reasoning/inference; it's a data model" argument applies here (this time, against your position).
>> 
>> -Tim
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Professor Luc Moreau
>>> Electronics and Computer Science
>>> University of Southampton 
>>> Southampton SO17 1BJ
>>> United Kingdom
>>> 
>>> On 5 Jun 2012, at 22:11, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 5:05 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Tim,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks for your example.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The following is not valid according to prov-dm:
>>>>> 
>>>>> prov:hadMember                                             # These would be asserted on a simple (first step)
>>>>>     36       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/John_Glover_Roberts,_Jr.>, # prov:Collection.
>>>>>     37       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Antonin_Scalia>,           #
>>>>>     38       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Anthony_Kennedy>,          #
>>>>>     39       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Clarence_Thomas>,          #
>>>>>     40       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg>,      #
>>>>>     41       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Stephen_Breyer>,           #
>>>>>     42       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Samuel_Alito>,             #
>>>>>     43       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Sonia_Sotomayor>,          #
>>>>>     44       <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Elena_Kagan>;       
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> The key reason why we went for a dictionary and, say, a set of entities,
>>>>> is that we are unable to decide whether an entity belongs to a set on the basis of
>>>>> its urls (since the same entity may be denoted by multiple urls).
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> huh? Why does that matter? In that case, we wouldn't be able to do it for Dictionaries, either.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -Tim
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Luc
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 05/06/2012 06:25, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> prov-wg,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I tried my hand at modeling the provenance of the U.S. Supreme Court's current membership, and its derivation to it's first membership.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The wiki page for the example is at:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Eg-34-us-supreme-court-membership
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In an attempt to take a fresh look at how we're modeling dictionaries (and collections?), I didn't reference PROV-DM, PROV-O, or any other examples or documentation -- I just tried to describe the subject matter.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> How does it look?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'd like to move PROV-O (and DM, if it needs tweaking) towards this kind of modeling and naming.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Discussion and feedback encouraged.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Later today, I'll try to start from scratch on the DM and work through the current PROV-O modeling, and then the recent threads on this topic.
>>>>>> I hope by then we can converge on a satisfactory design.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>   
>>>> 
>>