Fwd: prov-o rec confusion

All:

Below you'll find comments from Kerry Taylor on prov-o.

Again the issue seems to be the encoding of constraints in prov-o.

Paul

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au>
Date: Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 6:30 AM
Subject: prov-o rec confusion
To: pgroth@gmail.com


Hi Paul,
I am working on an "application" for the recommendation of prov-o, and I am
confused. I'm also not sure who to address this query/comment to -- please
feel free to forward as you consider appropriate.

All the transitive characteristics of properties (such as wasDerivedFrom)
seem to have disappeared from an earlier version of prov-o  I was working
with previously. I can't find any explanation for this, and am doubly
confused by this following extract from the  on the  candidate rec prov-o
spec (this is only an example in the spec, but it refers to asymmetric and
irreflexive characteristics  that have also disappeared).

"prov:wasDerivedFrom
   a owl:AsymmetricProperty, owl:IrreflexiveProperty, owl:ObjectProperty;
   rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#>;
   prov:inverse     "hadDerivation";
   rdfs:domain  prov:Entity;
   rdfs:range   prov:Entity;"

I have the impression that the functionality has been devolved instead to
the (more expressive)
"Constraints of the PROV Data Model", perhaps due to the pressure to be
OWL-RL compliant?

I would really like to see this brought back to PROV-O somehow.
Maybe a separate prov-o module declaring these things could be  developed
and  optionally imported if desired. (The missing inverse properties could
also be handled the same way).

Kerry



-- 
--
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
- Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group |
  Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
- The Network Institute
VU University Amsterdam