Re: Provenance ontology: prov:Insertion equivalent to prov:Removal

Hi,

Antoine, thanks for spotting the bug, and thanks Tim & Daniel for following
up on this.

It seems that the bug is also present in the PROV-Dictionary OWL file on
its own: http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-dictionary

Luckily, the Note itself seems fine to me:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-dictionary-20130430/#dictionary
I wonder though, if we change both OWL files to include

prov:dictionary rdfs:domain owl:unionOf (prov:Insertion prov:Removal) .
>

whether we would also need a table/statement similar to Table 5
<http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#owl-rl-violations> in PROV-O added to the
errata of PROV-Dictionary, or if that's overkill and the PROV-O statement
about the OWL 2 RL profile would be sufficient...

Tom

2015-06-26 15:49 GMT+02:00 Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>:

> Antoine,
>
> Thanks again for pointing out the issue in prov dictionary.
>
> I’ve logged it at https://github.com/timrdf/prov-wg/issues/7 for my own
> reference.
>
> Due to the nature of the W3C publishing process, we need to be very
> meticulous in any changes we make.
> Many apologies as I take time to review the documents and work to get them
> published.
>
> My guess is that this bug arose during the WG’s attempt to stay within
> OWL-RL; see http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#owl-profile
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
> On May 30, 2015, at 5:52 PM, Tim Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
>
> Thanks for following up, Daniel.
>
> And thanks for pointing out the issue that you found, Antoine.
>
> I'll make an issue for what you point out and work to resolve it. Making
> updates to the OWL after the WG closes out is a bit uncharted territory, so
> we'll see what we can do to make it right.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 30, 2015, at 13:17, Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Antoine,
> thanks for your feedback. It looks like you are right.
> I have contacted the editor of the document.
> We will look into this issue and fix the owl document if necessary.
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>
> 2015-05-28 9:24 GMT+02:00 Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>:
>
>> In the ontology at http://www.w3.org/ns/prov, the property
>> prov:dictionary has domain prov:Removal and prov:Insertion. Additionally,
>> prov:Removal and prov:Insertion both have a restriction owl:someValuesFrom
>> on property prov:dictionary.
>>
>> This makes prov:Removal and prov:Insertion equivalent.
>>
>> Probably, the intention was to say:
>>
>> prov:dictionary  rdfs:domain  [
>>     a  owl:Class;
>>     owl:unionOf  (prov:Insertion prov:Removal)
>> ] .
>> --
>> Antoine Zimmermann
>> ISCOD - Institut Henri Fayol
>> École des Mines de Saint-Étienne
>> 158 cours Fauriel
>> CS 62362
>> 42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
>> France
>> Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03
>> Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
>> http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
>>
>>
>
> Timothy Lebo
> lebot@rpi.edu
> https://impactstory.org/TimothyLebo
>
>