- From: Nandana Mihindukulasooriya <nmihindu@fi.upm.es>
- Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 14:56:28 +0200
- To: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Message-ID: <CAAOEr1kUMC_2L1rxbR0U4+XXFt3y=UQhCOZ1z7yC11T69WwpiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi, On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 11:07 PM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote: > > In side discussion, Riccardo and I have identified a proposal for closing > another issue on DQV > https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/186 - "There might be no need > for a subclass link between dqv:QualityMeasure and daq:Observation. I.e., > we could re-use daq:Observation directly" > > Following the decision not to re-use DaQ classes directly, the idea is > - to keep the class dqv:QualityMeasure > - to declare it equivalent to daq:Observation > - to declare it as a subclass of qb:Observation (which daq:Observation is) > [1] > +1 > Then we had a brief discussion on whether we should declare explicitly > dqv:QualityMeasure as a subclass of prov:Entity, which daq:Observation is > [1]. > I'm not so fond of it. It would make our specification heavier, and > prov:Entity is not semantically very instructive, anyway. > I'd have rather some guidelines on representing provenance, following the > resolutions we make in the other thread. These recommendations could end up > in infering that some instances of dqv:QualityMeasure are instance of > prov:Entity (e.g. if they're used as subject of prov:wasGeneratedBy). > This is how we currently do with dcat:Dataset and dcat:Distribution, as > shown in our current DQV diagram [2]. > I am neutral on whether the dqv:QualityMeasure has to be a subclass of prov:Entity or not. However, I think it is good to show that instances of dqv:QualityMeasure can be prov:Entity. If we don't make it a subclass, will we will include the relationships prov:wasGeneratedBy, prov:generatedAtTime, prov:wasAttributedTo ? I think it will be good to include them in the diagram similar to dcat:Dataset and dcat:Distribution and also include them in the examples to encourage their use. I talked with some colleagues from the W3C Provenance WG and one thing that they mentioned is that it is good to encourage people to declare the instances of dqv:QualityMeasure explicitly as prov:Entity in the data so that without any inference provence tools make use of that data. IMO, this can be done irrespective of whether the dqv:QualityMeasure is explictly declared as a subclass of prov:Entity not. Best Regards, Nandana
Received on Friday, 11 September 2015 12:57:19 UTC