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

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

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 21:26:48 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPRnXtmbJvuWGW3s5Q09wwNJPeBV_HJN6P3ATLZkwxBZ5mXG8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
Cc: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>, Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
I believe version IRI should always go totally to the OWL file.

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote:
>
> On May 7, 2012, at 11:52 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>
>> 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
>
> Do we use any content negotiation?  What if http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-o-20120503 was requested with a content type of "RDF/XML"?
>
> --Stephan
>
>>
>> -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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 20:27:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 May 2012 20:27:40 GMT