- From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 01:20:10 +0100
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 20:08, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: > hadQuoter could be replaced by reusing wasAttributedTo. This comes with some tradeoffs. Is prov-o team and wg okay with these tradeoffs? My argument for why they should not be replaced - see examples in https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/47b52dc6a91e/ontology/components/wasQuotedFrom-hadQuoter https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/47b52dc6a91e/ontology/components/wasQuotedFrom-hadQuoter/had-quoter.ttl shows how it is now. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/47b52dc6a91e/ontology/components/wasQuotedFrom-hadQuoter/had-quoter-was-attributed-to.ttl is trying to do as Tim is suggesting - using wasAttributedTo for both hadQuoter and hadQuoted - and why I think it does not work. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/47b52dc6a91e/ontology/components/wasQuotedFrom-hadQuoter/had-quoter-roles.ttl shows an attempt to solve this using roles - but this does not work when there are multiple quotations. In short, my argument is that wasQuotedFrom is more than a short hand for some wasAttributedTo links. As we know, wasAttributedTo just means that the agent wasAssociatedWith the activity that generated the entity. It does not say anything else about how or to what degree that agent was associated, it could be performing the activity, monitoring it. In my example, based on the PROV-DM example of the Dagstuhl blogpost paragraph, then there could be two agents who created the blog post, but only one of which was quoted. Similarly there could be two agents making the paragraph, but only one of them who was quoting. -- Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team School of Computer Science The University of Manchester
Received on Friday, 20 April 2012 00:21:04 UTC