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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model]

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 10:28:17 +0100
Message-ID: <4F6EE531.2050503@ninebynine.org>
To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
CC: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>, ProvenanceWorking Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On 24/03/2012 06:41, Paul Groth wrote:
> Hi
> I'm worried that using specialization in the definition of alternate. It might confuse people or is the intent that alternate is built on specialization?

That was my intention when I suggested (something like) this.

> Also the use of denote doesn't seem to have that common sense ease that the other definitions have.

I use the term "denote" in the sense that it is used in the RDF model theory: 
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/.  This is, I understand, common usage in this 
field.  Unfortunately, it's not mentioned in the glossary there.

Roughly, this corresponds to the interpretation mapping from names (URIs) to 
things (Resources).

The nearest synonym I can come up with is "represent", but that word tends 
commonly to be be used in fairly imprecise ways, so I end up using "denote" when 
I want to be more precise about a specific relationship between a name (or sign, 
or expression) and some thing represented.

I think that's fairly consistent with its common meaning; e.g. 
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/denote?q=denote

#g
--


> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks
> Paul
>
>
> On Mar 24, 2012, at 2:19, Timothy Lebo<lebot@rpi.edu>  wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 23, 2012, at 8:59 PM, Jim McCusker wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 23, 2012 6:32 PM, "Stian Soiland-Reyes"<soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 16:44, Jim McCusker<mccusj@rpi.edu>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>> .. not sure if we should include "roles" here as it would be confusing
>>>> with prov:hadRole (the old EntityInRole discussion).
>>>
>>> My intention is to use this to provide roles to entities within a particular context. We could leave this out, if it's too confusing.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'd suggest dropping this from the definition and just using it in your application.
>>
>>>> The current example of Bob with Facebook account is not very good. Why
>>>> would bobWithFacebook be an alternative of bobWithTwitter? Just
>>>> because they share bob as a parent specialization? Why would you form
>>>> such entities?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Because Bob exhibits different sets of behaviors in each of these environments.
>> He might be more casual on Facebook, but maintain a professional demeanor on Twitter. You're getting to know "two different people" (two altOf), even if they are the same person (the common specOf)
>>
>> Even if you know the Bob behind Facebook, you may not know the Bob behind Twitter.
>>
>> BTW, I added an example that uses alt and spec for real.
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Eg-19-derived-named-graph-attribution
>>
>>> JimAtYale and JimAtRPI being specializations of JimMcCusker (in general) are better examples, probably.
>>>
>>>> The BBC News home page today is a specialization of the BBC home page.
>>>> That could be a good one.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The BBC news home page today is a specialization of the BBC news page
>>>> in general. BBC does not provide a URI for a given day's news page, so
>>>> we mint our own:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> specializationOf(bbcNews2012-03-23,<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/>)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The mobile news page is an alternative of the desktop news page. They
>>>> are both specialization of (here unspecified) entity.
>>>>
>>>> alternativeOf(<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/>,<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/>)
>>>
>>> This is a perfect example.
>>>
>>
>> +10000
>>
>> -Tim
>>
>>>> The mobile news page of today is a specialization of the mobile news page:
>>>>
>>>> specializationOf(bbcNewsMobile2012-03-23,<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/>)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This implies (as /news/mobile and /news/ have a common specialization):
>>>>
>>>> alternativeOf(bbcNews2012-03-23, bbcNewsMobile2012-03-23)
>>>
>>> Yes, this all correctly follows.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>
>
Received on Sunday, 25 March 2012 10:26:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:59 GMT