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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-115 (Tlebo): prov:preceded should be replaced with prov:followed [Formal Model]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:28:08 -0500
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <65A033DE-8C1E-41EE-9F7A-4FADBD897135@rpi.edu>
To: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
That works. I closed it.

-Tim

On Mar 5, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Daniel Garijo wrote:

> Hi Tim,
> prov:preceeded no longer exists in the ontology. We have wasInformedBy or wasStartedByActivity
> to relate activities.
> 
> Can this issue be closed?
> 
> Thanks,
> Daniel
> 
> 
> 2011/10/5 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
> 
> PROV-ISSUE-115 (Tlebo): prov:preceded should be replaced with prov:followed [Formal Model]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/115
> 
> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
> On product: Formal Model
> 
> All other predicates are pointing from the newer rdfs:Resource to the older rdfs:Resource (e.g. prov:wasDerivedFrom).
> 
> This "backwards looking" paradigm makes sense because we need to describe newer things in terms of the older things sitting around.
> 
> prov:preceded is inconsistent with this paradigm, as it "looks forwards" to the newer one, which may not exist yet.
> 
> I recommend we REPLACE prov:preceded with prov:followed and reverse the definition. To keep the ontology trim, we should leave the definition of prov:followed's inverse to an extension.
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 16:41:25 GMT

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