Re: "Microsoft Access" for RDF?

This is what I meant in my earlier message when touching on collection.

If the order of the resources (let's stick with foaf:Person) matter, then
the property used should not have a range of (only) foaf:Person.

So say

One problem is that say in OWL you don't really have an easy way to type
collections, e.g. List<Person> in Java.

The rdf:List is integrated in multiple serializations, but has had issues
with queries (sparql property paths help) and usage in OWL, where you
easily get moanings about rdf: namespace being "special".

In OWL collections like co: you can use OWL restrictions to type collection
members, but this does push OWL into "AI land" as mentioned earlier - OWL
is not a schema language.

When we made prov:Collection it was meant as a genetic upper type of a
collection entity that could be used in-place of its members entities.

http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#Collection
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-prov-dm-20130430/Overview.html#term-collection

In the discussion for this, statements about a Collection, say

<policy> prov:wasAttributedTo :theBoard .
:theBoard a prov:Collection, prov:Agent ;
  prov:hadMember :alice, :bob, :charlie .

Then you still can't conclude that:
<policy> prov:wasAttributedTo :bob .

as he might or might not have contributed to the policy document whilst on
the board, but still is part-responsible for its creation (e.g. he didn't
veto it).

In the extension PROV Dictionary we agreed that order within a collection
was often important, and that arbitrary literal keys as commonly used in
JSON maps can have a meaning, even if just programmatic and not
semantically detailed.

A List can be just a dictionary using nonnegative integers as their keys.
(But you would have no EndOfList markers or guarantee that all keys were
described).

http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-dictionary-20130430/#dictionary-ontological-definition

You see the dictionary entries are here typed as prov:KeyValuePair, which
imply that the value is a member of the collection.

http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-dictionary-20130430/#dmembership-cmembership-inference

This is very similar to how CO has done inference between hasElement and
the property chain has item -> hasElementContent using just OWL.

http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://purl.org/co/#d4e76

One great advantage of CO collections is that they can easily be subclassed
and typed by restrictions, e.g.

  hasElement only foaf:Person

Such collections can then be used as the range of a property in Union with
foaf:Person.

On 20 Feb 2015 19:32, "Michael Brunnbauer" <brunni@netestate.de> wrote:
>
>
> Hello Pat,
>
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:45:12AM -0600, Pat Hayes wrote:
> > > Another simpler example would be <property> rdfs:range foaf:Person.
> > > http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_Person says that "Something is a
Person if it
> > > is a person". How can an RDF container of several persons be a person?
> >
> > According the US Supreme Court a corporation is a person, so I would
guess that a mere container would have no trouble geting past the censors.
>
> I am seriously interested in your position on the topic.
>
> Do you say that anything goes as long as it stays satisfiable?
>
> Should I assume that some property applying to some container/collection
also
> applies to its members (which seems to be the implicit assumption here)?
> Should I modify my SPARQL queries accordingly?
>
> Let me play the censor a bit more :-)
>
> Let's admit that Dan also means legal person with person. But not every
> group of individuals acting together is a legal person. The example here
was
> a group of people co-authoring a paper. Also, the notion that foaf:Group
is a
> subclass of foaf:Person does not make any sense to me. Why then introduce
> foaf:Group at all?
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael Brunnbauer
>
> --
> ++  Michael Brunnbauer
> ++  netEstate GmbH
> ++  Geisenhausener Straße 11a
> ++  81379 München
> ++  Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80
> ++  Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89
> ++  E-Mail brunni@netestate.de
> ++  http://www.netestate.de/
> ++
> ++  Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München)
> ++  USt-IdNr. DE221033342
> ++  Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer
> ++  Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel