- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 23:20:14 +0100
- To: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- CC: "<public-prov-wg@w3.org>" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|b06b8063422fb5a9bc62fb3c83f4e68co3HNLY08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F8F3E1E>
Hi Jun, So, if I understand you correctly, the only thing you would like to see is a relation eg. member(c,e) expressing that e is a member of c. We should remember that we are defining a provenance ontology, and to me, collection-specific relations should be "subrelation/specialization/refinement" of other existing relations in the model. Given that collections are themselves entities, than the only Entity x Entity relation we have that make sense here is a derivation. So, member(c,e) implies wasDerivedFrom(c,e) meaning that to generate collection c we needed e. That is workable I believe. It's a new relation in the derivation component. However, if you want to be able to say that set c was changed into c1, by adding/removing another entity, then you need further relations. As to your question, what would happen if you have optional key, I am not too sure. Currently, we have only one entity associated with one key. You are in fact suggesting a set of entities for one key. I am not too sure what would happen then. Luc On 18/04/12 22:41, Jun Zhao wrote: > Luc and all, > > Apology if I destroyed any proper threading! > > I want to say that I absolutely agree that the current collection > structure will be very useful for describing some type of provenance. > I have no doubt about its usefulness and the necessity for its > relatively more restrictive structure. > > However, Satya and I are trying to provide some examples to show the > need for some alternative more relaxed collection structure from DM, > like set. > > I don't like proposing people to use rdf collection or bag. Actually > the sioc use case doesn't need to use such rdf constructs. If sioc can > support this in their vocab, why can't ours? It's a very simple > membership relationship I am pushing for. No orders, no list, just a > set of stuff. > > Out of interest, what do we lose if we get the key as optional in the > model? > > Jun > > Sent from my iPad > > On 18 Apr 2012, at 22:20, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk > <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote: > >> Hi Satya, >> >> Therefore, in your cell line example, I suppose you don't want/cannot >> enumerate the cells, and >> therefore express insertion into/removal from the cell line? >> >> You may still want to distinguish the states of the cell line at two >> different instances and >> relate them by derivation? >> >> Luc >> >> On 18/04/12 21:33, Satya Sahoo wrote: >>> Hi Luc, >>> >>> >>> Do I understand correctly that those two collections do not >>> change: a cell line has a given number of cells, and the cohort >>> involves a set of patients. >>> >>> A cohort remains static during the period of study. The number of >>> cells may increase (by cell division) or decrease (by cell death). >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Best, >>> Satya >>> >>> So, yes, I understand that removal/insertion are not necessary >>> for such static collections. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Luc >>> >>> >>> On 18/04/12 17:35, Satya Sahoo wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> The issue I had raised last week is that collection is an >>>> important provenance construct, but the assumption of only >>>> key-value pair based collection is too narrow and the relations >>>> derivedByInsertionFrom, Derivation-by-Removal are over >>>> specifications that are not required. >>>> >>>> I have collected the following examples for collection, which >>>> only require the definition of the collection in DM5 >>>> (collection of entities) and they don't have (a) a key-value >>>> structure, and (b) derivedByInsertionFrom, derivedByRemovalFrom >>>> relations are not needed: >>>> 1. Cell line is a collection of cells used in many biomedical >>>> experiments. The provenance of the cell line (as a collection) >>>> include, who submitted the cell line, what method was used to >>>> authenticate the cell line, when was the given cell line >>>> contaminated? The provenance of the cells in a cell line >>>> include, what is the source of the cells (e.g. organism)? >>>> >>>> 2. A patient cohort is a collection of patients satisfying some >>>> constraints for a research study. The provenance of the cohort >>>> include, what eligibility criteria were used to identify the >>>> cohort, when was the cohort identified? The provenance of the >>>> patients in a cohort may include their health provider etc. >>>> >>>> Hope this helps our discussion. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Satya >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Luc Moreau >>>> <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Jun and Satya, >>>> >>>> Following today's call, ACTION-76 [1] and ACTION-77 [2] >>>> were raised against you, as we agreed. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Luc >>>> >>>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/76 >>>> [2] https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/77 >>>> >>>> >>>
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2012 22:22:07 UTC