- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:09:50 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi, As we discuss axioms of specialization/alternateOf is specializationOf reflexive? Luc On 03/27/2012 03:52 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > alt1 and alt2 is good. It is fairly obvious (but should be explained > in constraints) that alternateOf(a, b) indirectly implies > alternateOf(b, a), as it implies > > specializationOf(a, X) > specializationOf(b, X) > > and that implies: > > alternateOf(b, a) > alternateOf(a, b) > > > Would we need to say that if > > alternateOf(a, b) > alternateOf(a, c) > > it does not imply: > > alternateOf(b, c) > > ? > > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 22:46, Jim McCusker<mccusj@rpi.edu> wrote: > >> Do they need fully contextualized names? Can they just be a and b, or x and >> y? I'm pretty sure this isn't a qualified relation... >> >> Jim >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Luc Moreau<L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> BTW, has somebody got better names for first and second alternate? >>> >>> >>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-alternate.html#alternate.firstAlternate >>> >>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-alternate.html#alternate.secondAlternate >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Luc >>> >>> >>> On 26/03/12 22:38, Luc Moreau wrote: >>> >>> Hi Paolo, >>> >>> I have updated the text to make it clear that the common entity does not >>> need >>> to be identified. >>> >>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/21b96bf05727 >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Luc >>> >>> On 26/03/12 15:59, Paolo Missier wrote: >>> >>> Luc >>> >>> >>> On 3/26/12 2:54 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> Thanks for your very useful suggestions. >>> >>> I have drafted a revised section in a separate file >>> >>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-alternate.html >>> >>> Does capture what has been discussed so far? >>> >>> I think so. To me it is important that when we say >>> " They are both specialization of an (unspecified) entity." eg in the >>> first example, it is clear that there no obligation to say anything about >>> the common entity that they specialize. This, however, contrasts with the >>> definition itself: >>> " An entity is alternate of another if they are both a specialization of >>> some common entity." >>> It is not clear what to make of this defining property of alternates -- it >>> gives an existential condition which is not actionable in general. So to me >>> this is potentially confusing. >>> >>> >>> Also, if specialization(a,b) is it the case that alternateOf(a,b)? >>> >>> no. I recall that we've been there before. At some point there was a >>> discussion on specialization having a "top" and being transitive and >>> therefore, with this additional inferences, everything would collapse. >>> >>> Regards, >>> -Paolo >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Luc >>> >>> On 25/03/2012 17:16, Timothy Lebo wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Mar 25, 2012, at 9:43 AM, Jim McCusker wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 3:18 AM, Graham Klyne<GK@ninebynine.org> wrote: >>> >>>> In my review comments which I think you have yet to get round to, I >>>> question whether we actually need to have these concepts in the DM. >>>> >>>> Originally, by my recollection, they were introduced to explain the >>>> relationship between provenance entities and (possibly dynamic) real world >>>> things. With the looser description of the provenance model terms, I don't >>>> see why this level of detail is needed in the data model. >>>> >>> >>> Then you don't recollect correctly. >>> >>> >>> I remember IPV-of as the "relationship between provenance entities and >>> (possibly dynamic) real world things", but specializationOf has developed >>> into a more general association between entities that can include this >>> original purpose. Indeed, eg-19 [1] is using alt and specOf for _exactly_ >>> this original "frozen snapshot of changing things" notion -- applied to >>> datasets and web services. >>> >>> Instead of digging up the archives, perhaps we can rally around altOf and >>> specOf being the tools we use to associate (and make sense of) assertions >>> made by the combinations of scruffy and proper provenance. >>> (Like Simon's extension to Stian's BBC example). In addition, it's an >>> incredibly useful construct for one's own "proper" modeling. >>> >>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Eg-19-derived-named-graph-attribution >>> >>> They were defined because there was an acknowledgement that there were >>> multiple symbols that denoted a common thing in the world. Sometimes they >>> reflected different aspects of the same thing (alternativeOf) and sometimes >>> they had a subsumptive quality (specializationOf). >>> >>> >>> I think these previous two statements contradict (and steer scarily >>> towards owl:sameAs, which alt and specOf are certainly _not_) >>> Different aspects of the same thing are not the same things. >>> >>> -Tim >>> >>> >>> Jim >>> -- >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ----------- ~oo~ -------------- >>> Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org >>> School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, UK >>> http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 >> > > > -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2012 16:10:29 UTC