W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > February 2012

prov-o review / comments

From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 17:15:39 +0000
Message-ID: <4F43D13B.3050207@ncl.ac.uk>
To: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
   as requested, a few comments on the ontology (as of now: it's a rapidly moving or perhaps crystallizing target so some of the 
comments may have been superseded already)

==== A) on class hierarchies:

1 ====
dm says: hasOriginalSource is a strict sub-relation of wasDerivedFrom.
but in -o it's a sub-property of wasAssociatedWith

2 ===
tracedTo property hierarchy. some subclassing is part of DM, notably
   wasDerivedFrom  implies tracedTo
but I am not sure about others, e.g. specializationOf, wasAttributedTo, and more.

Is there a justification for this hierarchy?

====  B) on inferences:

Some inferences are captured, namely those that map to subclass relations, while others are not. Was this done systematically? I 
didn't check throughout  but for instance

wasQuotedFrom =>  wasAttributedTo in DM, but not in -o.
wasQuotedFrom =>  wasDerivedFrom in DM, but not in -o.

there is a rdfs:comment on this though:
"TODO: Shouldn't Quotation be a subtype of Derivation (and same for the binary relations?) -Tim  -- "

==== C) what is the intended usage of the involvement property (not the Involvement class)?

==== D) is the *qualified* property still needed?

==== E) 6.6 wasSummaryOf is a strict sub-relation of wasDerivedFrom.
   this is not the case in -o

(then again, summary may disappear in the future)

===  F) Trace Class

rdfs:comment says "A prov:Trace can be from any prov:Element to any prov:Element, so it cannot be a subclass of 
prov:EntityInvolvement or prov:ActivityInvolvement."

  but then Trace is in fact a subclass of EntityInvolvement?

==  G) equivalent classes EntityInvolvement (asnd  ActivityInvolvement)

why not just subclasses of (entity some Entity)? note that an OWL reasoner won't do anything with these equivalences at the moment.
I think Stian recently addressed this

==== H) class Role

is this class still needed?  isn't this subsumed by general attributes?
and if we keep it, currently the domain of hadRole includes Derivation, however this seems incorrect as there are no roles 
associated to derivation

Collections missing (Stian working on this I think)


-----------  ~oo~  --------------
Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 17:16:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:08 UTC