Re: writing a simple example in prov-o, help

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 22:24, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:

> - The duality of reusing the identifier heavily relies on accounts. But in
> most cases people won't assert an account. Is their some default account?
> What's the policy? I think one could assume that every expression was in its
> own account unless otherwise specified. Or is everything in one general
> account?

I think there's one default account per provenance container - read
one account per RDF graph/document/resource/file containing PROV-O
assertions.

You just don't know anything more about the default account. I don't
think it would make sense for all PROV statements with default
accounts to be merged to a single world-wide account, but perhaps
PROV-DM could clarify this.


>From http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#ProvenanceContainer

> All the expressions in exprs are implictly wrapped in a default account, scoping all the identifiers they declare directly, and constituting a toplevel account, in the hierarchy of accounts. Consequently, every provenance expression is always expressed in the context of an account, either explicitly in an asserted account, or implicitly in a container's default account.

I suggest modifying the first sentence to "are implictly wrapped in a
default account for that container". There is no top-level account
across provenance containers in the world.


I would also modify the definition of provenance container to say that
whenever you have a collection of PROV assertions, they are in a
provenance container, which represents the
document/collection/file/database that contains them all.  In PROV-ASN
this can be expressed as provenanceContainer(..)  (or is it
container(..) ??)

(Otherwise the question arises - what is the account for assertions
done outside a provenance container - like almost all the PROV-ASN
examples)


-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester

Received on Monday, 24 October 2011 10:08:00 UTC