Re: Quality check of ProvRDF

Hi all,
I reviewed the provRDF mapping page as discussed and the LHS signatures
conform to WD3 (and WD4 in many cases). I am not clear about including "id
a prov:Agent" on the RHS for Person, Organization, and SoftwareAgent - it
is not present in DM. If we include inferred triples, do we consider
prov:Entity also for these three cases?

Thanks.

Best,
Satya



On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:

>
> On Mar 15, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > I've gone through the ProvRDF page on my way to Boston.
> >
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF
> >
> > See changes:
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/index.php?title=ProvRDF&diff=6581&oldid=6536
>
>
> FWIW, changes to the PROV-N signatures in the ProvRDF page such as:
>
> |asnExpression([id],e,[a],[t],[attrs])
> +
> |asnExpression(id,e,a,t,[attr_1=val_1, ...])
>
> and
>
> |entity(id, [ attr1=val1, ...])
> +
> entity(id, [ attr_1=val1, ...])
>
>
> break the automated alignment check at
>
> http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/provrdf-owl-coverage
>
>
>
> If you want these signatures to change, please raise an issue against DM.
>
> Thanks,
> Tim
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > I've fixed the uneven spacing problem of the tables, it was caused by
> > intermediate spaces in the wiki markup, ie. instead of
> >
> >> | blahg
> >>
> >> | bluh
> >
> > use:
> >
> >> | blahg
> >> | bluh
> >
> >
> > I'll need to go through it again with a check against the OWL as I had
> > an old version in my checkout.
> >
> > Most notable changes are on derivation:
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF#Derivation
> >
> >
> > The prov:Derivation now includes prov:generation and prov:usage so
> > that it can fully represent the complete DM statement.
> >
> > Note that this presentation is particularly verbose, so I'm proposing
> > to add a new syntax to triples that are inferred from the others, so
> > that you can distinguish triple that come directly from the
> > translation (for instance :e1 prov:wasDerivedFrom :e1 or the type
> > signature, :ag a prov:Agent) from the directly inferred ones (such as
> > :ag a prov:Agent or :e2 prov:tracedTo :e1).
> >
> > Triples that come from inference rules should not be included, for
> > instance for wasQuotedFrom we should not include :e1
> > prov:wasAttributedTo :ag1. This is not representing the DM statement,
> > this is a conclusion that you can draw from the represented
> > prov:Quotation and its prov:quoter and prov:quoted.
> >
> >
> > We still need to sort some things out with the class hierarchy with
> > respect to attribute/involved-id 'inheritance' in DM .. for instance
> > will the attributes on a prov:Start also apply to a prov:Association?
> > DM does not seem to say so.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
> > School of Computer Science
> > The University of Manchester
> >
>
>
>