Re: Roles (was: Testing the ontology for expressing workflow provenance)

Hi Stian.
In first place, thanks for your example. It is very helpful to get things to
start moving.
In second place, you are right: the ontology has not been updated yet with
Satya's proposal
for modeling roles. I think it is better than specializing the "used"
property, since it allows
adding additional information withouth transforming the "Used" property in a
class (which is the
way to model n-ary relationchips). If we just specialize the "used"
property, then we won't be able to
link the time of usage, the location of usage, or anything additional
metadata.

However, we are still discussing this approach, because it is true that when
you don't know
the role of the used entity, everything might get a bit confusing.

You are welcome to join us on monday's telecons :)

Best,
Daniel

2011/9/9 Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>

> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:35, Stian Soiland-Reyes
> <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> >  <
> http://ns.taverna.org.uk/2011/run/2613aab1-dfe9-4a17-a4be-7589f5d388d6/>
> >    a  prov:ProcessExecution;
> >         prov:used [
> >             rdf:type
> > <
> http://ns.taverna.org.uk/2010/workflow/ea4168eb-67ea-440f-ab73-818da5efc998/processor/String_constant/out/value
> >
> >             prov:assumedBy
> > <
> http://ns.taverna.org.uk/2011/data/2613aab1-dfe9-4a17-a4be-7589f5d388d6/ref/153277f1-5e4f-43fc-968d-ab3a8b038676
> >
> > ;
>
> Note that I messed up the direction here - if something was 'used'
> then the role should of course be an *input* port.  Just imagine
> s/Output/Input/g for the whole thing as it is not possible to edit an
> email once it's sent. :-)
>
>
> (I wanted to do the discussion on 'used' rather than 'generated' - as
> use can naturally occur in several roles in several process execution
> - and indeed in several roles for the same execution)
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
> School of Computer Science
> The University of Manchester
>
>