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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-507: Data Model Tables 4 and 5 [prov-dm]

From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:37:51 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|5d081dab9c8b98511c1174e254717c24o89Abr08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|504DB4EF.4050307@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>

Hi all,

I would suggest the following response:

prov-dm, as  a conceptual model, only defines relations in one direction 
("pointing to the past").
Concrete, technology mapping (such a prov-o) may define "inverse" relations.

Suggested change: none.

Luc


On 09/10/2012 09:38 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-507: Data Model Tables 4 and 5   [prov-dm]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/507
>
> Raised by: Luc Moreau
> On product: prov-dm
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Tables_4_and_5
>
> ISSUE-463
>
> PROV-O gives the unqualified inverse of wasAssociatedWith as prov:wasAssociateFor, but that association isn't included in these tables. Please verify all docs in the PROV spec are internally consistent and complete, so that someone that reads only the data model spec is not missing information found in the ontology spec.
>
>
>
>

-- 
Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Monday, 10 September 2012 09:38:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 10 September 2012 09:38:23 GMT