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

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

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 13:52:17 -0400
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E3C07901-9C5C-4D20-97F2-6A636D3990A1@rpi.edu>
To: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Jun,

One additional note…


On May 7, 2012, at 1:48 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote:

> Jun,
> 
> We were able to discuss the idea of timestamping prov.owl in our call today.
> 
> If you look at:
> 
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/WD-prov-o-2012MMDD/ontology/ProvenanceOntology.owl
> 
> you will see:
> 
> <owl:versionInfo rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-o-2012MMDD"/>

This will resolve to the PROV-O HTML page that describes the release, e.g.:

http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-o-20120503

-Tim


> 
> Since this is in the owl file, it will allow anyone with the file to know which working draft (or release) the owl file represents.
> 
> 
> I've added notes to [1] so that this will be done upon the future releases.
> 
> Will this satisfy your needs? May we close the issue?
> 
> Thanks,
> Tim
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#Steps_taken_for_LC
> 
> 
> 
> On May 7, 2012, at 11:36 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote:
> 
>> Jun,
>> 
>> I am happy to help settle the versioning issues with the OWL ontology,
>> but I'm afraid that I'm not sure what your concerns are.
>> 
>> We have three options:
>> 
>> 1) hg tag the OWL file
>> 2) add to the prov-o html automation to reference the OWL version that it is documenting
>> 3) <> owl:versionURI
>> 
>> Could you please clarify your concerns so that we can scope the effort to address them?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>> 
>> 
>> On May 5, 2012, at 7:48 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>> 
>>> This seems good. Stian can you add it?
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> Paul
>>> 
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> --
>>> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
>>> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
>>> Assistant Professor
>>> Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group
>>> Artificial Intelligence Section
>>> Department of Computer Science
>>> VU University Amsterdam
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 17:52:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 May 2012 17:52:48 GMT