- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:48:00 +0200
- To: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- CC: "Groth, P.T." <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Err ... I wasn't suggesting that this be part of the standard. I thought Luc was asking where I would use an asserted tracedto edge and this is my use case. It's nice to have an edge that I know will be treated as transitive by other systems and it's nice to be able to put attributes on it. Paul On Apr 30, 2012, at 13:48, James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > The potential problem with this is that such an assertion could correspond to many different actual situations. So, if I send you a PROV instance that says > > tracedTo(foo,bar,[confidence=0.5]) > > and nothing else, what does this mean? Is it legal to just say tracedTo on its own? What constraints or inferences apply? > > This seems to be a way of expressing metadata/beliefs about provenance data, rather than expressing the data itself. One could do this as an overlay on PROV without requiring everyone that uses PROV to support it, I think. > > --James > > On Apr 30, 2012, at 12:31 PM, Paul Groth wrote: > >> My concrete use case would be to put things like confidence values on >> these links. For example, in one of our systems we "guess" if there is >> a tracedto and what to put some confidence value on that link. This is >> one of the reasons I like attributes in the model. >> >> We could do this with derivation so it's not a big deal but the nice >> thing is that traced to is transitive... >> >> cheers >> Paul >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: >>> Hi Paul, >>> >>> Do you have a concrete use case, in particular, with attributes? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Luc >>> >>> On 04/30/2012 12:17 PM, Paul Groth wrote: >>>> I think traced-to is useful to sometime assert especially in the case >>>> where you want to be very vague about provenance. It's also nice to >>>> have attributes so that you can associate other sorts of information >>>> with it. >>>> >>>> However, if others think it's nicer to be inference only then I won't >>>> be stand in the way. >>>> >>>> cheers >>>> Paul >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue >>>> Tracker<sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/370 >>>>> >>>>> Raised by: Luc Moreau >>>>> On product: prov-dm >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> TracedTo was introduced in the data model so as to have a transitive relation over derivations, etc. It can be inferred. In contrast, its definition as an assertion was not very compelling. In the latest version of prov-constraints, it is only defined as something that can be inferred. >>>>> >>>>> Really, it looks like a relation that is useful to express queries. >>>>> >>>>> So, in the spirit of simplification, should we move it out of prov-dm, and have it defined in prov-constraints only. >>>>> >>>>> At the same time, it could be simplified to a binary relation, since we have no way of inferring attributes for this relation. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >
Received on Monday, 30 April 2012 13:48:36 UTC