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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-152 (QualifiedInvolvement): will the QualifiedInvolvement approach work for other relations? [Ontology]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:43:52 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|a6173d9622c3fd9e721a367c59db4e15o24LiE08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F553398.6080502@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Yes, 152 can be closed, but 262 is still open.
Cheers,
Luc

On 05/03/12 19:01, Timothy Lebo wrote:
> Ah. ISSUE 152 is overtaken by 
> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/262 ?
>
> You still consider 262 open, right?
>
> -Tim
>
>
> On Mar 5, 2012, at 11:56 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>
>> yes, Daniel, it's now overtaken by events. The issue can be closed.
>>
>> On 05/03/2012 16:49, Daniel Garijo wrote:
>>> Hi Luc,
>>> Right now we have used "Involvement" to qualify the different 
>>> properties.
>>> The property that links "Elements" with "Involvements" is qualified.
>>> There is an additional issue about being able to express things with 
>>> the ontology
>>> that we are not able to express in the DM (issue 
>>> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/262),
>>> so I propose to close this issue.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> 2011/11/18 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker 
>>> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org <mailto:sysbot%2Btracker@w3.org>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     PROV-ISSUE-152 (QualifiedInvolvement): will the
>>>     QualifiedInvolvement approach work for other relations? [Ontology]
>>>
>>>     http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/152
>>>
>>>     Raised by: Luc Moreau
>>>     On product: Ontology
>>>
>>>
>>>     The prov-o document has introduced a qualifier for
>>>     participation, which is not in prov-dm.  There is increasing
>>>     evidence that it is useful to qualify all/most relations of prov-dm.
>>>
>>>     Is the approach for qualifiedInvolvement be extensible for all
>>>     relations? In particular, for Activity -> Activity relations,
>>>     such as wasInformedBy.
>>>
>>>     QualifiedInvolvement seems to have "The hadQualifiedEntity
>>>     property links the QualifiedInvolvement class with the Entity
>>>     class.". But wasInformedBy does not have entity?
>>>
>>>     Thoughts?
>>>
>>>     Note, this issue shouldn't block the release of the document as
>>>     fpwd.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 21:45:12 GMT

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