- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 22:28:35 -0400
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
On Sep 16, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 23:18, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: > >>> prov:characterizedBy >>> a owl:AnnotationProperty ; >>> rdfs:domain prov:Entity . >>> rdfs:range rdf:Property . > > You could also here set rdfs:range to prov:characterizingProperty to > achieve what you say below, but OWL experts will have to tell me if > that would actually work together with your SPARQL query. Are "characterizing properties" used to infer the sameness of different Entities based on shared values? If so, owl:key is the answer. I just described it in a previous email on this thread. > > >> However, the modeling of the Stian's second variation could be a bit cleaner using rdfs:subPropertyOf . >> >> :colour rdfs:subPropertyOf prov:characterizingProperty . >> :owner rdfs:subPropertyOf prov:characterizingProperty . > > While I like this simplified approach and the beauty of the resulting > SPARQL, this unfortunately makes :colour and :owner characterizing > properties of any entity uses them. my:Car owl:key ( :colour :owner ) . only applies to the class my:Car . Though, if my:Car is owl:equivalentClass owl:Thing, then it WOULD apply to all entities that used them.... > The problem is that by our model > it is up to the asserter to determine for each entity what are the > characterizing properties. I'd say it is _NOT_ up to the asserter to determine what the "identifying properties" (I'm renaming characterizing to reflect what I think it is doing) It is up to the _reader_ to determine sameness of different Entities laying around; and they can use OR IGNORE the owl:key axioms offered when determining sameness. -Tim
Received on Saturday, 17 September 2011 02:29:11 UTC