Re: Some comments on prov-dictionary

Tom and Sam,

Thanks for looking over my tardy feedback.

Regards,
Tim

On Feb 19, 2013, at 5:05 AM, Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be> wrote:

> 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!