- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:06:13 +0100
- To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Tim, Yes, it would make a lot of sense to introduce a prov:value attribute. It also makes sense that you would want reuse existing rdf mechanisms to express the same notion. Luc On 04/16/2012 04:35 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > On Apr 16, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > > >> Hi Tim, >> >> Just a word to say that it's a problem that is not specific to the ontology. >> The problem is similar in other serializations. >> Should we have a statement about this in the dm? >> > That makes sense. Would you life to reserve prov:value? > PROV-O will not define prov:value in favor of rdf:value. > I think the rest of the PROV-O solution (content in RDF vocab) would fall outside of DM's control, as we've done before. > > -Tim > > >> Luc >> >> On 04/16/2012 02:18 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote: >> >>> Paul (and Graham), >>> >>> The prov-o team discussed this last week and agreed that this topic is more appropriate in the best practices document. >>> We also outlined the recommended patterns. >>> >>> I put a stub entry at >>> >>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/1a7d883e143e/bestpractices/BestPractices.html#using-strings >>> >>> that says: >>> >>> * If you want to break RL and any tools built around PROV-O, just use a string. >>> * If you want to follow the datatype/objectproperty distinction, use a resource with rdf:value OR >>> * use content in rdf http://www.w3.org/TR/Content-in-RDF10/ >>> >>> 1) >>> Can we move this issue to the best practices product? >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/7 >>> >>> 2) >>> Can you put a "string-heavy" example into http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_examples to motivate further development of the best practice? >>> >>> 3) >>> Can we close ISSUE-248 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/248 as a duplicate of this issue? >>> >>> >>> On Jan 19, 2012, at 4:36 AM, Graham Klyne wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Paul, >>>> >>>> This problem is, IMO, an atifact of the arguably arbitrary restrictions of description logic and OWL-DL. If you don't need to be consrainted to OWL-DL then the problem does not arise. Just saying. >>>> >>>> >>> The problem does arise practically, too. If the range of prov:used is a rdfs:Resource, then tools will handle it as such (and not a string). >>> So tools will choke while reading your account, even if they don't care about reasoning. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> Staying with the object/datatype property distinction, I think either of your suggested approaches can work, but I don't know about semantics of entity here - it seems to me that it should be possoible to formulate the semantics around two properties as well as one, even if the formulation is more complex. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> The second approach avoids the semantic uncertainties at the costof some added complexity in RDF representation. >>>> >>>> >>> @Graham, could you elaborate this approach, so that we can articulate it in the best practices document? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I'm not sure this helps :( >>>> >>>> #g >>>> -- >>>> >>>> On 18/01/2012 09:40, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/222 >>>>> >>>>> Raised by: Paul Groth >>>>> On product: Ontology >>>>> >>>>> Currently, prov-o:used is defined as an objectproperty. This is fine. However, we've be doing some modeling here at the VU where the parameter to a program is a string. Currently, this is not modelled using a prov-o:used edge but it seems like it should be. Is there anyway we can support this? >>>>> >>>>> My first inclination is to define a corresponding datatype property but this make break the semantics of entity... >>>>> >>>>> Another option might be to suggest using a blank node with the string attached using an application specific predicate. >>>>> >>>>> Suggestions? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Professor Luc Moreau >> Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 >> University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 >> Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk >> United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm >> >> >> >> > -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2012 08:06:54 UTC