W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > November 2012

Re: F2F Decision: Provenance

From: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 09:33:53 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFPX2kC3PhRnBCE+qzwPARs5SCbHU1QN+N4aqptJVTXuCqJPUw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: public-openannotation@w3.org
Dear Graham,
thank you for your feedback and welcome to the group!

I am assuming
a prov:alternativeOf v
was meant to be
a prov:alternativeOf b

The current definition of oa:equivalent is: The subject and object
resources of the oa:equivalent relationship represent the same Annotation,
but potentially have different metadata such as generator, generated and
serialization format. oa:equivalent is a symmetrical relationship; if A
oa:equivalent B, then it is also true that B oa:equivalent A.

Basically it is a mechanism to allow multiple 'copies' of the same
annotation. Each copy identified by a different URI and can have different

Given this and given your explanation, I believe prov:alternativeOf has a
broader meaning than oa:equvalentTo. Maybe we can keep our original
property and declare it a sub-property of prove:alternativeOf?

We would appreciate more feedback from the prov group on this matter.


ps: we will fix prov:generatedAt

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>wrote:

> Hi all,
> I may be coming late to this party.  Sorry if I grab the wrong end of the
> stick here.  I'm a participant in the prov group, but here am speaking
> strictly for myself - other members of the group may disagree.
> ...
> prov:alternativeOf isn't quite the same as "equivalence", though it's
> possible that it's similar to ao:equivalent.  I don't know if ao:equivalent
> means more or less than one might expect of "equivalent".
> My interpetation of prov:alternativeOf is roughtly
> exists(c)
> a prov:specializationOf c
> b prov:specializationOf c
> |-
> a prov:alternativeOf v
> where
> a prov:specializationOf c means that the resource a is resource c
> constrained to some interval or context or situation.
> E.g. (Boston in 1776) prov:specializationOf (Boston)
> Following this, we might have
> (Boston in 1776) prov:alternativeOf (Boston in 2012)
> Are they equivalent?  I'd say not.  But do they in some sense refer to the
> same thing?  I'd say so.
> If that kind of semantics works for AO, then fine, but I'm suspecting it
> may be somewhat different to what you might expect.  It's not, for example,
> like the old rdf:Alternate class.
> ...
> As far as I'm aware, there is no prov:generatedAt property.  Do you mean
> prov:generartedAtTime?  (http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#**generatedAtTime<http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#generatedAtTime>
> )
> #g
> --
> On 01/11/2012 10:39, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I guess the lack of reaction means everyone agrees :-)
>> I may have trouble the very idea of representing oa:Annotation as direct
>> result
>> of the generating, as opposed to the direct result of annotating. But I'll
>> clearly need some more time to get my head around it.
>> One trivial for now is replacing oa:generator with oa:generatedBy.
>> This makes the property seem very close to prov:wasGeneratedBy, in a
>> context
>> where OA and PROV would be used together. While they are quite different
>> in
>> reality: range of oa:generatedBy would be agent, range of
>> prov:wasGeneratedBy is
>> prov:Activity.
>> Antoine
>>  This part of the discussion covered two primary topics related to
>>> provenance and the W3C Provenance Ontology.
>>> 1.  Can we replace oa:equivalent with something from the Prov work?
>>> Decision:  Yes, prov:alternateOf is semantically identical to
>>> oa:equivalent
>>> Thus we'll simply replace all mentions of oa:equivalent in the
>>> specification with prov:alternateOf
>>> 2.  What is the relationship between the current (simple) provenance
>>> information recorded for an annotation, and the Prov work?
>>> Decisions:
>>>   - Replace oa:generated with prov:generatedAt, as they are
>>> semantically identical
>>>   - Replace oa:generator with oa:generatedBy, and subclass of
>>> prov:wasAttributedTo
>>>   - Replace oa:annotated with oa:annotatedAt (to follow the generatedAt
>>> pattern)
>>>   - Replace oa:annotator with oa:annotatedBy
>>>   - Include a diagram of the mapping in the specification
>>> (Diagram attached)
>>> Thanks,
>>> Rob&  Paolo
Received on Friday, 2 November 2012 13:34:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:38:20 UTC