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: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 16:54:35 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAtgn=SxcB_uph0urL0f8UW=QkbGDcOt3eAQup4uPbwcTTQERg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Yes, that's fine.

Jim

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Daniel Garijo <
dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es> wrote:

> 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
>>
>>
>


-- 
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 16:55:28 GMT

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