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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-371 (junzhao): timestamped provo.owl [PROV-O HTML]

From: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 12:26:54 +0100
Message-ID: <4FA26B7E.7010108@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
On 03/05/2012 11:02, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> Don't you think the OWL should contain something like
>
> <>  owl:versionIRI
> <www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-o-20120501/ProvenanceOntology.owl>   ?

Stian, yes, we should also have that!

-- Jun

>
> I would +1 that as people like myself will download the OWL locally
> for processing with say Sesame-Elmo, and it later will be important to
> know which one it is based on.
>
> We just need to know the magic date to add it in advance.
>
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Jun Zhao<jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>  wrote:
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> I am happy with what we will do with the public release.
>>
>> And dealing with versioning for internal releases can wait if you are
>> overwhelmed by other commitment at the moment.
>>
>> -- Jun
>>
>>
>> On 02/05/2012 00:27, Tim Lebo wrote:
>>>
>>> Jun,
>>>
>>> The prov.owl will be "copied" to the official w3c website directory when
>>> the WD2 is published on Thursday, so there will be no question about what
>>> OWL file the HTML is talking about.
>>>
>>> Hopefully, the "dereferencability problem" (which paul took on and we
>>> asked Daniel to help with) will be addressed soon, which will provide the
>>> latest OWL when requesting the terms' URIs.
>>>
>>> If we want to be explicit about what version of the ontology the HTML is
>>> taking about, I can look into exposing that within every compiled draft up
>>> to LC that is due in a few weeks. But generally, these are always in sync
>>> because the ontology changes less frequently and the HTML is generated much
>>> more frequently.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Please let me know which aspects you need most, so that we can address the
>>> right issues soon.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On May 1, 2012, at 11:38, Provenance Working Group Issue
>>> Tracker<sysbot+tracker@w3.org>    wrote:
>>>
>>>> PROV-ISSUE-371 (junzhao): timestamped provo.owl [PROV-O HTML]
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/371
>>>>
>>>> Raised by: Jun Zhao
>>>> On product: PROV-O HTML
>>>>
>>>> Can we talk  about when or whether we will have snapshots for our
>>>> ontology, like  ProvenanceOntology-20120430.owl? Or achieve similar
>>>> functionality via other mechanisms?
>>>>
>>>> Because our ontology is still work in progress, it is important to have
>>>> the right ontology content associated with each prov-o spec public release
>>>> or even work draft.
>>>>
>>>> I think this would be something really nice to have at least for this
>>>> upcoming public release.
>>>>
>>>> I am happy to discuss more on this.
>>>>
>>>> -- Jun
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2012 11:27:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 3 May 2012 11:27:20 GMT