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

Re: future-proofing prov-o.owl (and "namespace concatenation")

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:26:29 -0500
Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org WG" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3BBFDB1A-21D4-404D-AEE5-5516A06A1F8C@w3.org>
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Some questions

- (just to make it sure) you staged these under CR-prov-***/ns but it is not the intention, is it, to put this into the /TR/2012/.../ns directory. The target for all these files is www.w3.org/ns 

- The .owl extension goes to RDF/XML files, I presume. I wonder whether we should not use extension-less URI-s everywhere, eg, http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-20120724, and let conneg work to choose among RDF/XML or turtle versions. You should check whether an average OWL processor handles such conneg properly...

- What will I get if I dereference  http://www.w3.org/ns/prov ?

Ivan


On Nov 20, 2012, at 10:25 , Timothy Lebo wrote:

> Ivan, prov-wg, OWL-in-practice gurus, and anyone concerned with the "prov ns concatenation" issue,
> 
> I've staged the prov-o ontology files to go into /ns:
> 
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/ontology/releases/CR-prov-o-20121211/ns
> 
> The directory contains the files for {prov, inverses} \cross {versioned, unversioned} \cross {rdf/xml, turtle}
> 
> Each of the two ontologies (provo, inverses) has a owl:versionIRI, prov:wasRevisionOf, and prov:specializationOf, i.e.,
> 
> from provo http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/de8cda493917/ontology/releases/CR-prov-o-20121211/ns/prov-o.ttl#l30 :
> 
>     30 <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
> >
> 
>     31     a owl:Ontology ;
>     37     owl:versionIRI <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-20121211.owl
> > ;
> 
>     38     :specializationOf <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o.owl
> > ;
> 
>     39     :wasRevisionOf <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-20120724.owl> .
> 
> and from inverses http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/de8cda493917/ontology/releases/CR-prov-o-20121211/ns/prov-o-inverses.ttl#l7 :
> 
>      7 <> a owl:Ontology;
>     11    owl:versionIRI        <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-inverses-20121211.owl
> >;
> 
>     12    prov:wasRevisionOf    <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-inverses-20120724.owl
> >;
> 
>     13    prov:specializationOf <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-inverses.owl> .
> 
> 
> The PROV HTML points to the "unversioned" OWL files, specifically:
> 
> [[
> The OWL encoding of the PROV Ontology is available here (http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o.owl)
> ]]
> 
> and 
> 
> [[
> For convenience, this file (http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-inverses.owl) lists the resulting inverse properties.
> ]]
> 
> 
> I believe from this setup that consumers will be able to:
> * recognize when the OWL encoding was updated (via a new owl:versionIRI), 
> * find the previous version (via wasRevisionOf), and 
> * find the latest version at any point in the future from their current copy of the OWL encoding (specializationOf).
> 
> 1) Do you agree? Is this an acceptable arrangement?
> 
> 
> 2) Looking ahead to the "namespace concatenation" [1], I would expect that I should change the URIs for the "provo" and "inverses" ontologies, to something like:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o#
> and
> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-inverses#
> 
> Does that sound reasonable?
> 
> Thanks,
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvNamespaceManagement#Solution_2.2_Use_owl:import_and_return_full_merge_of_PROV-O_and_all_Notes
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2012 16:26:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 20 November 2012 16:26:57 GMT