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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-96 (entities and roles): Relating Roled Entities with non-Roled Entities [Conceptual Model]

From: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 16:16:47 +0100
Message-ID: <CAExK0DcbhW_F5eXjTPvE0hP9NjAuSOv78tw-ZbaspRKffUBzOQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>
Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Jim,
This issue is still raised.
Roles are not anymore a type of entities, si we should be able to close it.
Thoughts?

Daniel

2012/1/18 Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>

> **
> Hi Jim,
>
> Since we talk about prov-dm here, I am not sure I am following you with
> this notion of role with specialization.
>
> Currently, the prov:role attribute is defined as follows
>
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#dfn-role
>
> This definition suggests only one form of role.
>
> Luc
>
>
> On 17/01/12 23:20, Jim McCusker wrote:
>
> With the current state of things, roles can be expressed using
> specializationOf with an extra type on the specialization or as a
> qualification on an event. I prefer the former, but many prefer the latter.
> If the group is happy with having both methods of specifying roles, we're
> done. I'm a little uncomfortable with it, but it seems that we are talking
> about two very different levels of formality on each. If we moved hadRole
> to Entity from the qualification, then it becomes easy to translate between
> the two patterns using OWL. It might be possible on the qualification too,
> but it might require inverse properties to do correctly, and I don't know
> if it would be convertable both ways.
>
>  Jim
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>wrote:
>
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> I am not sure where we are on this issue, whether the  discussion on
>> alternateOf is addressing it,
>> or whether the current draft is already addressing your concerns.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Luc
>>
>>
>> On 15/09/11 18:46, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>
>>> PROV-ISSUE-96 (entities and roles): Relating Roled Entities with
>>> non-Roled Entities [Conceptual Model]
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/96
>>>
>>> Raised by: James McCusker
>>> On product: Conceptual Model
>>>
>>> Let's say we have Entities "Jim McCusker" and "Jim McCusker as first
>>> author of XYZ paper". Under the current proposal, "Jim McCusker as first
>>> author of XYZ paper" is of type Entity and also of type FirstAuthor, which
>>> is a subclass of Entity and is therefore a Role. Since "Jim McCusker as
>>> first author of XYZ paper" is contextualized by that role, it's not correct
>>> for that to share the same URI as "Jim McCusker". However, there is some
>>> sort of relationship.
>>>
>>> I'd like to propose that complementOf, or whatever succeeds it, is that
>>> relationship. It follows the same pattern of "same entity in different
>>> contexts", as the role is a particular non-temporal, non-spatial
>>> contextualization.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
> Jim McCusker
> Programmer Analyst
> Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
> Yale School of Medicine
> james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330
> http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu
>
> PhD Student
> Tetherless World Constellation
> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
> mccusj@cs.rpi.edu
> http://tw.rpi.edu
>
>
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 15:17:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:58 GMT