W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > August 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-65 (domain-specific-info): How is domain specific data combined with the generic model [Conceptual Model]

From: Simon Miles <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 18:23:06 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKc1nHdGhw_=JPBRWPiqJB2mgDV2Jm3yjmKrHcMGe0Qv5po6aA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Satya,

> This is my perspective flowing from my understanding how the conceptual
> model and the formal model relate to each other:
> rdfs:subClassOf in the conceptual model translates to "specialization." For
> example file is a specialization of entity (similarly for
> rdfs:subPropertyOf).
> In the conceptual model and formal model documents, we should include the
> above details, that is the mechanism for extending the provenance model for
> domain-specific (under "extensibility" section).

Sure, but I think this is still in terms that make sense for the
formal model not the conceptual model. What does specialisation mean
with regard to:
  bob(e4)

Does it mean adding attributes, e.g. [type: "file"]? Or having another
assertion "file(e4)" which implies "bob(e4)"? Or an independent
assertion in a form outside the scope of PIL but able to be asserted
along with PIL statements, e.g. { bob(e4); e4 rdfs:subclassOf ns:file
}?  And how do I express a sub-property of "isGeneratedBy" in PIL?

> I am not sure if you were suggesting to describe domain-specific details
> (royal society etc.) in the conceptual model document (except as part of the
> examples)?

There is already some domain-specific information in the examples,
e.g. creator: "Alice", but as said in the original issue description,
it is not clear exactly what is domain-specific and what is generic.
More importantly, there is no general statement of how domain-specific
information could be included.

Thanks,
Simon

> Thanks.
> Best,
> Satya
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Simon Miles <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Satya,
>>
>> I agree that it sounds a sensible approach for the formal model.
>>
>> The important point is that however we explain how to include
>> domain-specific information in the conceptual model should match the
>> way we allow it in the formal model.
>>
>> I am not clear how rdfs:subClassOf and rdfs:subPropertyOf translate
>> into inclusion of domain information in the conceptual model / PIL,
>> and this is exactly the kind of thing I was pushing to be clarified.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Simon
>>
>> On 4 August 2011 16:01, Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > In ontology engineering we have the notions of a "upper-level
>> > ontology(s)"
>> > and "domain-specific ontology(s)". The upper-level ontology - the PIL
>> > provenance model in our case, is extended to model domain specific
>> > details -
>> > the royal society details described by Simon, using sub class
>> > (rdfs:subClassOf) and sub property links (rdfs:subPropertyOf).
>> > This allows different applications to "subscribe" to a common
>> > upper-level
>> > ontology and add their own domain-specific details as needed without
>> > affecting other applications.
>> > Thanks.
>> > Best,
>> > Satya
>> > p.s: We did in the context of the Provenir ontology earlier for
>> > biomedicine
>> > and taverna [1] - see Quick Links
>> > [1] http://wiki.knoesis.org/index.php/Provenir_Ontology
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'd like to add:
>> >>
>> >> I think it is important that when domain specific information is added,
>> >> it
>> >> appears in such a way that applications that do not understand it can
>> >> safely
>> >> ignore it and still be able to use the underlying generic provenance
>> >> information.
>> >>
>> >> This shouldn't be hard to achieve, but I think it's an important
>> >> principle
>> >> to underpin extensibility.
>> >>
>> >> #g
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >> Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> PROV-ISSUE-65 (domain-specific-info): How is domain specific data
>> >>> combined with the generic model [Conceptual Model]
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/65
>> >>>
>> >>> Raised by: Simon Miles
>> >>> On product: Conceptual Model
>> >>>
>> >>> Any provenance data will be a mixture of PIL constructs and
>> >>> domain-specific information, e.g. file names, the Royal Society's
>> >>> membership, the event of the RS's foundation, etc. By domain-specific,
>> >>> I
>> >>> just mean things not defined in the conceptual model. It is not clear
>> >>> in the
>> >>> current document where this domain-specific information goes.
>> >>>
>> >>> There are a couple of hints about where it might go:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. In the example, the attribute values appear to be domain-specific,
>> >>> e.g. "Alice" is not a generic part of the model. The attribute names
>> >>> might
>> >>> be domain-specific, as I don't think "type", "location", "creator" or
>> >>> "content" are defined in the model, but that might be a mistake in the
>> >>> model. Can attribute types be domain-specific?
>> >>>
>> >>> 2. Section 5.12 says that "there are numerous ways in which location
>> >>> can
>> >>> be specified", suggesting that it is made a domain-specific issue. I'm
>> >>> not
>> >>> clear whether the list of examples, "coordinate, address..." are
>> >>> examples of
>> >>> attribute types or something else. It is said that "Location is an
>> >>> OPTIONAL
>> >>> characteristics of BOB". I'm not sure if "characteristic" is related
>> >>> to
>> >>> "attribute", and if this is implying a generic attribute type called
>> >>> "location".
>> >>>
>> >>> But are there additional ways to include domain-specific information
>> >>> other than attribute types and values? It may be trivial to address,
>> >>> but
>> >>> seems important to make explicit, else it is not clear how to apply
>> >>> the
>> >>> language in practice.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Simon
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
>> > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr Simon Miles
>> Lecturer, Department of Informatics
>> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
>> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
>



-- 
Dr Simon Miles
Lecturer, Department of Informatics
Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
+44 (0)20 7848 1166
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 17:23:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:50:59 UTC