Re: Using PROV to express conformance results

If you are working in OWL, you can state that a particular activity belongs
to a class (which indicates conformance) or that it belongs to the
complement of that class, which indicates non-conformance.

Jim
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 6:45 AM Daniel Garijo <
dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es> wrote:

> Hi Andrea,
> a prov:Plan is defined as a "an entity that represents a set of actions or
> steps intended by one or more agents to achieve some goals". A plan is
> something like a recipe, and to me, a w3c standard doesn't look like it, is
> more a set of rules.
> Best,
> Daniel
>
> 2015-05-08 15:44 GMT+02:00 Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>:
>
>> Thanks a lot again, Daniel.
>>
>> Please find my comments inline.
>>
>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Daniel Garijo
>> <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es> wrote:
>> > Hi Andrea,
>> > I'm not sure if using dct:conformsTo is a nice idea here. If you see the
>> > range of that property
>> > (http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-conformsTo), it is
>> an
>> > "established Standard". I don't think that any test case could be
>> considered
>> > an established standard. IMO, this property is meant to be used with
>> > something like "this xml document conforms to the XML standard"
>> (:document
>> > dct:conformsTo <http://www.w3.org/XML/> (or the URL you want to use to
>> refer
>> > to XML as a resource)).
>>
>> Actually, the definition of dct:Standard (the range of dct:conformsTo)
>> is broader:
>>
>> [[
>> A basis for comparison; a reference point against which other things
>> can be evaluated.
>> ]]
>>
>> (http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-Standard)
>>
>> In my understanding, this covers specifications (possibly including
>> test cases) which have not been necessarily released by a
>> standardisation body.
>>
>> Said that, the use of done of dct:conformsTo in DCAT-AP and GeoDCAT-AP
>> is to link to a specification like, as you say, the one describing
>> XML, and not to a set of test cases.
>>
>> > Asserting that a document passes a given test is out of the scope of
>> PROV.
>> > However, PROV could be used to say that a result was generated by
>> executing
>> > a testing activity that was associated with the conformance test as a
>> plan
>> > and used the given resource as input:
>> >
>> > :testing_activity
>> >    a prov:Activity;
>> >    prov:used :givenResource;
>> >    prov:wasAssociatedWith :agentWhoExecutedTheTest;
>> >    prov:qualifiedAssociation [
>> >       a prov:Association;
>> >       prov:agent   :agentWhoExecutedTheTest;
>> >       prov:hadPlan :conformance_test;
>> >    ];
>> > .
>> > :result
>> >    a prov:Entity;
>> >    prov:wasGeneratedBy :testingActivity.
>> >
>> > :conformance_test
>> >    a prov:Plan, prov:Entity;
>> >    rdfs:comment "Unitary test 12331."@en;
>> > .
>> >
>> > Would that help?
>>
>> Thanks a lot, Daniel.
>>
>> May I ask if prov:hadPlan could be used also to link to the reference
>> specification (e.g., the XML W3C Recommendation) and not only to the
>> set of test cases carried out?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Andrea
>>
>>
>