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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-383 (how-to-handle-subtypes): How to handle subtypes in PROV-DM [prov-dm]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 14:46:02 +0000
To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
CC: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EMEW3|7d38c6e583cef36549052f74a843b642o4MGp108L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|79DD2ACC-EDC9-4911-B735-2414B75ED6D1@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Paul

That's not the way it works currently.

You have to write entity(ex:pl,[prov:type='proc:Plan'])

The rationale is that in PRoV, plans carry no special semantics beyond being entities. There are no constraints for plans, for instance.


Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science
University of Southampton 
Southampton SO17 1BJ
United Kingdom

On 23 May 2012, at 15:11, "Paul Groth" <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:

> Hi Luc,
> 
> Shouldn't they all have each?
> 
> I mean can we not write plan(blah;...) in prov-n?
> 
> cheers
> Paul
> 
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue
> Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>> PROV-ISSUE-383 (how-to-handle-subtypes): How to handle subtypes in PROV-DM [prov-dm]
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/383
>> 
>> Raised by: Luc Moreau
>> On product: prov-dm
>> 
>> 
>> PROV-DM defines a variety of subtypes and handles them differently.
>> 
>> Some have an explicit prov-n construct (I think for those, it's a legacy
>> of the past, when signatures were not uniform).
>> 
>> Some are explicitly represented in UML diagrams, some are not.
>> Some are listed in table 4.
>> 
>>                          PROV-N      in UML  in Table 4
>>                         notation       diag
>> 
>> wasRevisionOf              yes          yes      yes
>> 
>> hadOriginalSource          yes          yes      yes
>> 
>> wasQuotedFrom              yes          yes      yes
>> 
>> prov:Plan                  no           yes       no
>> 
>> prov:SoftwareAgent         no           no        no
>> 
>> prov:Organization          no           no        no
>> 
>> prov:Person                no           no        no
>> 
>> prov:Bundle                no           yes       yes
>> 
>> prov:Collection            no           yes       yes
>> 
>> prov:Dictionary            no           yes       yes
>> 
>> prov:EmptyDictionary       no           no        no
>> 
>> Suggestions on how to handle them systematically are welcome!
>> 
>> Luc
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> 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 Wednesday, 23 May 2012 15:51:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 23 May 2012 15:51:39 GMT