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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-306 (TLebo): PROV-O OWL review (5/6) Luc [Ontology]

From: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 01:37:44 +0100
Message-ID: <CAExK0DfGgR1zZcwhT4RKkqDQq-7Tb=8iVeCNPFDp-OTQK5ePbA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Hi Luc,

> Dear prov-o team,
>
> In my review, I focused on a subset usage, derivation, generation, and
> association
>
> I raised a few issues:
>
> - (ISSUE-253) http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/253
>    some properties (e.g. activity, entity, adoptedPlan) of involvements
> need to made functional
>
> - (ISSUE-253) http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/253
>    the domain of hadTemporalExtent is broader than in prov-dm
>
> - (ISSUE-262) http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/262
>    the ontology seems to allow an entity to be used (with qualified
> usage) by another entity.
>
> - (ISSUE-263) http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/263
>     Involvements such as usage can be shared by multiple activities.
>
> Furthermore, the ontology allows for instances of involvements to be
> expressed, without
> specifying its subclass (Usage, Generation, etc). This is not aligned
> with the data model.
>
> I'll raise this as a separate issue. My opinion is that we should add an
note in the documentation
explaining that the "Involvement" class is for creating a structured
hierarchy, and that should not
be used directly. If some one wants to extend the model, it should extend
the subclasses instead.

>
> Choice of name: I understand 'hadTemporalExtent' as 'had a duration'.
> But Usage and Generation,
> for instance, have got instantaneous time. I don't understand why
> xsd:dateTime is not directly associated
> by means of a data property.
>
> Now "InstantaneousEvent" is atTime dateTime. "atTime" is a data property.

Given that everything is raised separately or has been addressed, can we
close issue 306?
Thanks,
Daniel

>
> Regards,
> Luc
>
>

2012/3/5 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>

> PROV-ISSUE-306 (TLebo): PROV-O OWL review (5/6) Luc  [Ontology]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/306
>
> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
> On product: Ontology
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/mid/EMEW3|d505635e75ac02f386bea5657febc725o1M9U208L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F460718.5030205@ecs.soton.ac.uk
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF#WG_feedback_Feb_2012
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.02.23#PROV-O_Ontology:_Reviewer_feedback
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2012 00:38:13 GMT

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