Re: PROV-ISSUE-444 (prov-o-to-last-call): Review PROV-O for last call [PROV-O HTML]

Hi prov-o team,

Thanks for producing the document. Here are a few comments on the 
ontology, before I start reading
the html document.

I think you removed too many of the property characteristics, some of 
which are prov-o specific
(as opposed to being prov-constraints specific).

Otherwise,  I think the ontology is aligned with prov-dm. I think that 
Influence and influencer are
quite nice!

Cheers,
Luc


1. hadRole: why is domain defined as intersection of Influence and six 
of its subclasses.
    Why not the subclasses directly?


2. qualifiedXXX: shouldn't they be inverseFunctional?
   Otherwise, this would allow for a given Influence instance, to be a 
qualified Influence
   for multiple subjects. This is not intended.

   The qualified pattern is prov-o specific. It was inverse functional 
before, but I think
    this characteristic was incorrectly removed.

3 influencer: should it be functional: there is only one influencer per
qualified pattern instance, isn't there.

4. Likewise:
hadPlan: is functional
hadUsage: is functional
hadGeneration: is functional
hadActivity: is functional

    As per prov-dm.

5. generatedAtTime: In owl file: editorialNote "It is the intent that 
the property chain holds: (prov:qualifiedGeneration o prov:atTime) 
rdfs:subPropertyOf prov:generatedAtTime."@en

--> It cannot be functional since qualifiedGeneration is not functional.

Also applies to all the others, invalidatedAtTime, startedAtTime, 
endedAtTime,


Cheers,
Luc


On 03/07/2012 21:20, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-444 (prov-o-to-last-call): Review PROV-O for last call [PROV-O HTML]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/444
>
> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
> On product: PROV-O HTML
>
> PROV-O is ready for internal review for Last Call release.
>
> The document is at:
>
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/last-call/2012-07-03-internal-review/Overview.html
>
> Please respond to this thread with general feedback and answers to the following questions:
>
> 1) Are there any issues that should delay the WG's release of PROV-O as Last Call (i.e., is all of the technical work done).
>
>
> 2) Are the examples and scenario adequate?
>
>
> 3) Should the links to prov-dm, prov-constraints, and prov-n stay in the cross reference?
>
> Regards,
> Tim prov:actedOnBehalfOf :prov-o-team .
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2012 09:26:41 UTC