- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 09:07:52 +0200
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Stian, Thanks for the examples. I think it gives a good rational to introduce hadQuoter. The question is in general *who* do we need to identify? I think the possibilities are: - The person being quoted - The person doing the quoting I think a clearer predicate would be quotationAttributedTo but that doesn't follow our predicate naming approach. Also, there's a question as to whether introducing these extra relations helps or hurts. Do we need to model more than attribution relation for a quotation? Thanks for bringing this up, Paul On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: > 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 > -- -- Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ Assistant Professor Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group Artificial Intelligence Section Department of Computer Science VU University Amsterdam
Received on Friday, 20 April 2012 07:08:26 UTC