Re: examples with blank nodes in prov-o html document

On Feb 12, 2013, at 12:07 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

> 
> Hi Tim,
> 
> I don't know of a way to translate this rdf in an interoperable way


(As I've said) I do; you mint an identifier.


> since we have not specified this in our specs.
> 
> It's for that reason I thought this example should be changed.

(are we still talking about https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/5495d990f17b/testcases/provo/prov-o-property-hadUsage-PASS.ttl ?)

But, it's valid PROV-O. Why should it be changed?
There's nothing special about the blank node other than it doesn't have a URI.
It's still a legitimate resource. And any URI that you choose to identify that resource will do.

Are you still suggesting that this example change?

-Tim


> 
> Luc
> 
> On 02/12/2013 03:26 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>> On Feb 12, 2013, at 10:09 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>> 
>>> If we do, and convert back to rdf, we don't have an equivalent rdf representation.
>> Yes, you would :-)
>> 
>> -Tim
>> 
>> 
>>> Professor Luc Moreau
>>> Electronics and Computer Science
>>> University of Southampton
>>> Southampton SO17 1BJ
>>> United Kingdom
>>> 
>>> On 12 Feb 2013, at 15:00, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Feb 12, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Dm/XML/prov-n require an explicit identifier which we don't have in this example.
>>>> Why not make one up?
>>>> 
>>>> -TIm
>>>> 
>>>>> Professor Luc Moreau
>>>>> Electronics and Computer Science
>>>>> University of Southampton
>>>>> Southampton SO17 1BJ
>>>>> United Kingdom
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 12 Feb 2013, at 14:54, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Luc,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The prov-o document has several examples with blank nodes.
>>>>>>>>> Some of them are difficult
>>>>>>>>> to express in prov-n/prov-xml.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Consider:
>>>>>>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/5495d990f17b/testcases/provo/prov-o-property-hadUsage-PASS.ttl
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The usage has no identifier we can use in the derivation.
>>>>>>>> Any identifier will do; you may choose a new one for each bnode you find.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Should we keep examples of this kind in the specification or should we introduce an explicit
>>>>>>>>> identifier for usage here?
>>>>>>>> We are using blank nodes to help the reader focus on the structure of the PROV-O pattern.
>>>>>>>> I think this is appropriate for the audience of PROV-O.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Perhaps it's just a matter of knowing how to handle bnodes when mapping to other serializations?
>>>>>>> We don't specify that. So, we don't  how express that example in prov-xml/prov-n.
>>>>>> In XML, it'd be an element with no @id attribute (since, that's exactly what a blank node is).
>>>>>> I haven't written any translators to XML or N, so I guess I don't understand the problem clearly enough.
>>>>>> What is difficult about "filling something in" if it's not there?
>>>>>> This is exactly the correct interpretation of a bnode.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
> 
> -- 
> 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
> 
> 
>