- From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:11:37 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Stian I recall a discussion with example as part of ISSUE-95 (now part of formal model): http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/95 isn't that thread relevant? -Paolo On 9/28/11 11:04 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-102 (hadRecipe): Ontology is missing recipe link [Formal Model] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/102 > > Raised by: Stian Soiland-Reyes > On product: Formal Model > > The Conceptual Model allows the definition of *recipe links* on a ProcessExceution. In particular in the workflow example - - it would be useful to have the prov:recipe property or equivalent. > > I propose: > > > <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="#hadRecipe"> > <rdf:type rdf:resource="&owl;AsymmetricProperty"/> > <!-- functional?<rdf:type rdf:resource="&owl;FunctionalProperty"/> --> > <rdf:type rdf:resource="&owl;IrreflexiveProperty"/> > <rdfs:label xml:lang="en" > >had recipe</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en" > >The ProcessExecution activity performed was described by > the given recipe resource. Process specifications, as > referred to by recipe links, are out of scope of this > specification</rdfs:comment> > <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#ProcessExecution"/> > </owl:ObjectProperty> > > I am not sure about the exact term and propose "prov:hadRecipe" here according to the general guidelines (verb in past, pointing to the past) > > As pointed out by others the PE might not have gone according to the plan, so it should be quite loose, not "prov:executedAccordingToRecipe". > > Note that ISSUE-95 discusses if Recipe should be a class or not - I've left the rdfs:range open above as the recipe model is not specified by this model - a marker-class prov:Recipe might be useful, but also confusing. > > > -- ----------- ~oo~ -------------- Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, UK http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier
Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2011 10:12:04 UTC