Re: Update on PROV-O OWL file (Action item 55)

Satya:

I just said getting prov-o could be done by adding an element...not that it should be done this way.

Paul

On Feb 16, 2012, at 21:45, Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu> wrote:

> Hi Ivan,
> Thank you for the feedback!
> 
> As Stian mentioned, we can address the issue of having union of classes as domain of the prov:hasTemporalValue property. But as Luc replied the PROV-DM TPWD associated time information with both Entity and Activity, which are disjoint. Asserting the domain as owl:Thing is also a RL profile violation. 
> 
> The use of a new Element class suggested by Paul also has issues since it is not clear if the Element class will subsume Entity, Activity, QualifiedInvolvement -and- Role, Bundle, Role, and Time. If it does not it will violate the DM TPWD and if it does then it will be equivalent to owl:Thing.
> 
> Some additional comments are inline: 
> 
> 
> ie, using a union of classes as part of the domain is not allowed. The rules also express this. And, although a layperson in terms of hard core logic, I can see why: if a resource is the subject of that property, a simple rule engine _cannot_ find out which of the constituents of the union it belongs to. Ie, it cannot make any intelligent deduction.
> 
> Can you please clarify the above point - reasoners do consistency check (class with no possible instance) and classification (identify inferred sub/super class), the above example of inferring class membership seems to be a RDFS entailment. 
>  
> A similar issue arises with:
> 
> <owl:Class rdf:about="Time">
>    <owl:equivalentClass>
> I.e., again, we do not have a Union.
> 
> This follows from the best practices of creating "defined versus "primitive" class to enable reasoners to check that time values in PROV can only be instant or interval. But, we can easily remove this constraint.
> 
> We will try to resolve these issues in discussion with DM editors and make prov-o compliant with RL.
>  
> Thanks.
> 
> Best,
> Satya
> 
> I am not sure what this means back in the model that is transcribed into OWL.
> 
> Ivan
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/#OWL_2_RL
> 
> On Feb 14, 2012, at 23:24 , Satya Sahoo wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > After two meetings by the PROV-O team on Feb 13 and Feb 14 [1], we have updated the OWL file and made it available for review by the WG [2].
> >
> > We would like to note that we support only the wasStartedBy defined between an activity and an agent, and not wasStartedBy defined between activity and activity, and activity and entity (the definition of wasStartedBy is defined in three ways by DM-TPWD in Section 6.2 and Section 5.3.2.2).
> >
> > All feedback is welcome!
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Best,
> > Satya
> >
> > [1] Minutes of the PROV-O telcon:  http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2012-02-13
> > [2] PROV-O OWL File: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/ProvenanceOntology.owl
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>