- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:26:00 -0500
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <1702727E-827C-4395-909D-892A650B32CE@rpi.edu>
Is there a problem to solve here? Otherwise, I'm happy to let it drop. Regards, Tim On Feb 12, 2013, at 1:17 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi Tim, > > This would be your way of tackling the problem, but it's not a way that any PROV document > has specified. > That's why, from my point of view, this solution is not interoperable. > > It is valid PROV-O, I agree, but without equivalent in the data model, since in this > example, the derivation refers to a usage, and PROV mandates the presence of an identifier. > > Luc > > > On 12/02/13 18:08, Timothy Lebo wrote: >> >> 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 >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > 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 Tuesday, 12 February 2013 18:26:36 UTC