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

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

From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 10:26:04 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|18f91837c19e31dff752915d48b6d257o63AQ808l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4FF40C2C.1010308@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
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!


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, 


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:17 UTC