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

It would be nice to have Provo examples that can translate into well form provn and valid according to prov-constrains. It's not the case now.
With an explicit identifier for usage, it would be.

--
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


________________________________________
From: Timothy Lebo [lebot@rpi.edu]
Sent: 12 February 2013 6:26 PM
To: Luc Moreau
Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: examples with blank nodes in prov-o html document

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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:lebot@rpi.edu>> wrote:

On Feb 12, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk<mailto: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<mailto:lebot@rpi.edu>> wrote:

Luc,

On Feb 12, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk<mailto: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<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm<http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/%7Elavm>






--
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<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm

Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 20:01:13 UTC