Re: Qualified Involvements proposal

Paul,

Yes, I would say unqualified relations can be inferred from their qualifications.

I added a section with an example and rules at:

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Qualifed_Involvements_in_PROV-O#Inferring_Unqualified_Involvements_from_the_assertion_of_Qualified_Involvements

-Tim


On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:36 AM, Daniel Garijo wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> we also discussed propety chains that would inferr the unqualified relationships,
> but we decided to address the possible issues with the approach before going
> too far with the inference.
> 
> So the answer is yes, they can be inferred.
> 
> Best,
> Daniel
> 
> 2011/11/7 Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
> Hi Tim, all:
> 
> This is a really nice proposal. I think very consistent and seems fairly easy to explain.
> 
> I was wondering if one has to assert unqualified involvement or can that be inferred from the qualified involvement pattern?
> 
> cheers,
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> Timothy Lebo wrote:
> prov-wg,
> 
> The following link reflects the OWL group's discussions from the past week about replacing EntityInRole with qualified involvements.
> 
> Please have a read.
> 
> If you'd like to join our Monday noon US ET (we switched our clocks today) skype discussions, please let me and Satya know.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Qualifed_Involvements_in_PROV-O
> 
> Regards,
> Tim Lebo
> 
> -- 
> 
>