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

Re: Please approve this draft PROV-O response by Tuesday 5pm GMT

From: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 19:03:15 +0000
Message-ID: <CAANah+Ge75LjBmFkwbtdk9LcPJK+ye8z=aVaW1o0Qm+HBmdWzQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
+1

khalid

On 5 November 2012 13:55, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
> prov-wg,
>
> Your approval is needed for the draft response to issue 552.
>
> The response is at
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-552_.28Influence_subclasses.29
>
> and is copied below.
>
> Please raise objections before tomorrow 5pm UK time, so that we can close
> this out before the F2F.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
> ISSUE-552 (Influence subclasses)
>
> Original email:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2012Sep/0000.html
> Tracker: https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/552
> Group Response:
>
> On "subclassing Influence":
>
> The WG agrees with the suggestion that the phrase "a particular case of
> derivation" should be expressed using rdfs:subClassOf.
> Since the prov-dm's definitions for revision, quotation, and primary source
> mention that they are "particular case[s] of derivation", then it follows
> that each should be subclasses in the PROV-O encoding. We changed PROV-O to
> include these three classes as a subclass of Derivation.
> The WG aggress with the reviewer that "a kind of" is a more natural phrasing
> than "a particular case", and so we have adopted it as suggested.
>
> On the phrasing of definitions:
>
> It was pointed out that the definitions for
> "{Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence" are inconsistent with that of their
> parent class "Influence".
> The source of this inconsistency is that {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence
> are not defined by prov-dm, but by prov-o as artifacts of encoding prov-dm's
> model into the paradigm of OWL (i.e., the use of the qualification pattern
> to describe binary relations).
> The inconsistent definitions were "demoted" to rdfs:comments because they
> focus too heavily on the RDF and OWL paradigm and not enough on how they are
> expressing the abstract model of prov-dm.
> New definitions were created to align with their parent class, with a focus
> on how the classes are expressing the abstract model of prov-dm.
>
> On the inconsistency of subclasses according to "general understanding of
> the english terms":
>
> The reviewer points out that the definitions of Influence, EntityInfluence,
> and Start illustrate an inconsistency: "influence is a capacity, an entity
> influence is a provider (of descriptions) and a start is a "when" (a time)".
> The WG acknowledges that the definitions as shown support this concern.
> The inconsistency between Influence and its immediate subclasses
> {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence is addressed by the response to the earlier
> comment ("phrasing of definitions").
> To address the inconsistency between {Influence,
> {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence} and {Start,End}, PROV-DM updated the
> definitions for Start and End:
>
> Start is when an activity is deemed to have been started by an an entity,
> known as trigger . The activity did not exist before its start. Any usage,
> generation, or invalidation involving an activity follows the activity's
> start. A start may refer to a trigger entity that set off the activity, or
> to an activity, known as starter , that generated the trigger. ref
> End is when an activity is deemed to have been ended by an entity, known as
> trigger . The activity no longer exists after its end. Any usage,
> generation, or invalidation involving an activity precedes the activity's
> end. An end may refer to a trigger entity that terminated the activity, or
> to an activity, known as ender that generated the trigger. ref
>
> References:
> Changes to the document:
>
> prov-dm updated the definitions for revision, quotation, and primary source
> to reinforce that each is a relation.
> prov-o changed to add axioms:
>
> prov:Revision rdfs:subClassOf prov:Derivation .
> prov:PrimarySource rdfs:subClassOf prov:Derivation .
> prov:Quotation rdfs:subClassOf prov:Derivation .
>
> prov-o "demoted" the original definitions of
> {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence to rdfs:comments.
> prov-o created new definitions for {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence to align
> with their parent class definition.
> prov-o removed existing comments on {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence that
> were very similar to the new "prov-dm centric" definitions. The removed
> comments had more of an OWL flavor to them instead of an abstract flavor.
> For example, the following comment was removed:
>
> "ActivityInfluence is intended to be a general subclass of Influence of an
> Activity. It is a superclass for more specific kinds of Influences (e.g.
> Generation, Communication, and Invalidation)." in favor of the definition
> "ActivitiyInfluence is the capacity an activity to have an effect on the
> character, development, or behavior of another by means of generation,
> invalidation, communication, or other."
>
> The latest draft of the PROV-O html document reflects the definitions
> changed in the PROV-O OWL file:
>
> http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#EntityInfluence,
> http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#ActivityInfluence,
> http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#AgentInfluence
>
> PROV-DM's new definition for Start -> PROV-O's new definition for Start
> PROV-DM's new definition for End -> PROV-O's new definition for End
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 13, 2012, at 7:27 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker
> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>
> PROV-ISSUE-552 (subclass-prov-o): Check subclass definitions in prov-o
> [Ontology]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/552
>
> Raised by: Paul Groth
> On product: Ontology
>
> See email from Alan Ruttenberg
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2012 19:03:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 6 November 2012 19:03:47 GMT