Re: Some comments on prov-dictionary

Hi Tim, thanks for your comments. You spotted some hickups that every other
reviewer missed!

I've responded below

>
> 1)
>
> "These operations result in new snapshots, each snapshot forming an
> identifiable dictionary entity."
> ->
> "These operations result in new snapshots, each snapshot forming a
> distinct and identifiable dictionary entity."
>
> Done, tnx.


> 2)
>
> Example 1:
>
> :d1 a prov:Dictionary;
>     prov:hadDictionaryMember [
>        a prov:KeyValuePair;
>
>
> Why not reuse prov:hadMember?
> Is it to reconcile with PROV-N's need for a new term?
>
> Yes. it is. However, nothing stops you from writing prov:hadMember as
well. Think of prov:hadDictionaryMember as a qualified membership. You
could assert both of them.


>
> 3)
>
> Example 3:
>
>    prov:qualifiedRemoval [
>       a prov:Removal;
>       prov:dictionary :d2;
>       prov:removed    "k1"^^xsd:string,
>                       "k3"^^xsd:string;
>    ];
>
>
>
> why not prov:removedKey?
>
> (BTW, #Removal shows prov:removedKey -- is this inconsistent?)
>
> Well spotted, this was a leftover from the previous version. Fixed.


>
> 4)
>
> The example for #Dictionary is not clearly a dictionary.
> Perhaps make it:
>
> @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
> @prefix xsd:  <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
> @prefix owl:  <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
> @prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
> @prefix my:     <http://example.org/ontology#> .
> @prefix :     <http://example.org/> .
>
> :seating_chart_2012
>    a prov:Dictionary, prov:Collection, prov:Entity, my:SeatingChart;
>    prov:derivedByInsertionFrom :seating_chart_2011;
>    dcterms:date "2012";
>    my:hasTotalStudents 45;
> .
>
> Done.

>
>
> 5)
> #Insertion
>
> Is prov:insertedKeyValuePair a shorthand for :
>
>    prov:qualifiedInsertion [ a prov:Insertion; prov:inserted [ a
> prov:KeyValuePair; ] ]
> ?
>
> If so, this should be mentioned, since it conflicts what the PROV-O
> section #dictionary-ontological-definition
> Also, this shorthand should be mentioned in
> #dictionary-ontological-definition
>
>
> It isn't, prov:inserted was changed to prov:insertedKeyValuePair for
consistency and clarity. This was something from the previous version.

>
>
> 6)
>
> If #insertedKeyValuePair is really a shorthand, this should be mentioned
> in the comment/definition.
>
> See above.

>
>
> 7)
>
> #removedKey
>
> show
>
>       prov:removedKey "k1"^^xsd:string,
>                        1337,
>                        3.14;
>
> can the key be any rdfs:Literal?
> That's fine, I just want to make sure.
>
>
> Yes.

I've also deleted the double predicate in #hadDictionaryMember.


Thanks!