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

Re: Definition of role

From: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 18:02:01 +0100
Message-ID: <4FC7A409.2020202@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
On 31/05/2012 17:11, Graham Klyne wrote:
> Following today's teleconference, this came to me:
>
> [[
> A role is a restriction on a relationship between entities, agents and/or
> activities, which qualifies the nature of the relationship.
> ]]
>
> I think that says what's needed. But it does need supporting by some examples.

I wanted to get that out quickly, knowing I have limited time.  I'd like to try 
and flesh it out a bit with some examples...

...

5.7.2.3 prov:role

A role is a restriction on a relationship between entities, agents and/or
activities, which qualifies the nature of the relationship.

The attribute prov:role is allowed to occur multiple times in the attribute list 
of a relation. The value associated with a prov:role attribute must be a PROV-DM 
Value.

(agent-activity):

   wasAssociatedWith(a, ag, [ prov:role="operator" ])

(agent-entity):

   wasAttributedTo(film, Clint, [prov:role="producer", prov:role="director"] )

(agent-agent):

   actedOnBehalfOf(barrister, client, arbitration, [prov:role="negotiator"])

NOTE: 3-way relation here

(activity-entity):

   used(ex:div01, ex:cell, [ prov:role="divisor" ])

   generated(ex:cell2, ex:div01, [prov:role="quotient"])

(activity-agent):

   wasAssociatedWith(teleconference, Ralph, Zakim, [prov:role="developer"])

(entity-entity):

   wasDerivedFrom(graph, data, analyst, a[prov:role="presentationOf"]

...

Thus, it seems to me that role makes sense in all these relations over core 
concepts.  I'm not suggesting that all these examples should be used, but I 
wanted to do the exercise.

#g
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2012 17:03:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 31 May 2012 17:03:10 GMT