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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-321 (dgarijo): Instances of involvements can be expressed without a subclass. [Ontology]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 20:51:36 -0400
Message-Id: <4928305C-2233-4DAC-9E71-57D7B84CC0C6@rpi.edu>
To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
I propose to close this, as it overlaps with ISSUE-264 which has already been closed.

-Tim

On Mar 27, 2012, at 8:48 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote:

> Luc,
> 
> It is true that:
> 
> :blah a prov:Involvement .
> 
> is a valid statement in prov-o.
> 
> Since this issue was raised, all Involvements were "flattened" into ActivityInvolvement, EntityInvolvement, and AgentInvolvement -- each of which is a subclass of Involvement.
> This structure is the foundation of qualifications, and I am concerned that remove it will reduce understandability and thus adoption.
> 
> I believe this concern was also aligned with the "lose" prov:qualified property that could point at any Involvement.
> With prov:qualified replaced by its sub properties with specific ranges to prov:Usage, etc., is this issue less of a concern?
> 
> Thanks,
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 14, 2012, at 8:37 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> 
>> PROV-ISSUE-321 (dgarijo): Instances of involvements can be expressed without a subclass. [Ontology]
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/321
>> 
>> Raised by: Luc Moreau
>> On product: Ontology
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2012 00:52:05 GMT

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