Re: Today's prov-o team telecon


Thanks, a question below.

On 11 Apr 2012, at 18:06, "Timothy Lebo" <<>> wrote:


On Apr 10, 2012, at 3:16 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:

Hi Tim,

Can you clarify the implication of this resolution:

  *   hadActivity for a Responsibility (Agent->Agent) ISSUE-226
     *   PROPOSE: relax domain of hadActivity so that a Responsibility can use it.
     *   Derivation -> Activity via prov:hadActivity
     *   RESOLVED: change prov:hadActivity domain from Derivation to Involvement.
     *   TODO: make clearer in the HTML how to use it. (in 3.3)

It now seems that we can have Attribution, Quotation, etc in the domain of hadActivity. This is not in line with DM.

This will be a persistent tradeoff in RL, and I don't know how to resolve this kind of interpretation. It's simply not what the axioms say. The reasoning you use is incorrect.
I've outlined the inferences that one can obtain with rdfs:domain before, and showed that there is not an inconsistency or an inference that does not make sense.

prov:hadActivity rdfs:domain prov:Involvement .
:s prov:hadActivity :a
:s a prov:Involvement

this is different than saying:
:q a prov:Quotation
:q prov:hadActivity :activity

which is NOT derivable in the current ontology, but how you are interpreting it.
A class being in the domain of a property does NOT imply that the class uses that property.

The axioms that you're thinking of are minCardinality 1 / someValuesFrom, etc., which WOULD imply that the class has the property.

Also, Generation is in the domain of both activity and hadActivity. Isn't this strange?

resources described with prov:activity are prov:ActivityInvolvements.
resources described with prov:hadActivity are prov:Involvements .
Being a subclass of either of these classes does not imply that you are described with either of these properties.

Isn't it the case that the following statements are consistent with the ontology.

 :g a Generation
   prov:activity :a1
   prov:hadActivity :a2

:q a Quotation
   prov:hadActivity :a2

I just don't how to understand these, in terms of the DM.



Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science
University of Southampton
Southampton SO17 1BJ
United Kingdom

On 9 Apr 2012, at 17:33, "Timothy Lebo" <<>> wrote:

We had a quick meeting due to the UK holiday.

Minutes are at


On Apr 9, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote:

Thanks, Paolo.

It's not a holiday on this side of the pond, but I took the day off myself.

Rest of prov-o, will you be joining?
Please email me directly if you'd rather keep this off list.


On Apr 9, 2012, at 10:38 AM, Paolo Missier wrote:

apologies, not joining, it's a UK holiday today (and I believe this is true at least of the rest of Europe?)


On 4/9/12 3:30 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote:
prov-o team,

The agenda for today's telecon is at:

Please be prepared to:
1) raise topics from last week's feedback that the team should discuss during meeting
2) discuss the ISSUEs listed on the agenda.


Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 21:50:10 UTC