call for feedback! Re: [owl changed] ISSUE-83: Express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology

prov-wg,

The prov-o team is looking for feedback on ONLY the following section:

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/318372af5976/ontology/Overview.html#names-of-inverse-properties

It's a screenful of text.

Suggestions on inverse names are welcome, but don't spend too much time on the current names. Our interest is whether or not we got the discussion correct.

Thanks!
Tim


On Apr 30, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote:

> This ISSUE has moved forward a few steps.
> 
> Stian has added prov:inverse annotations to the ontology, and 
> the appendix and table are available at:
> 
> http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#names-of-inverse-properties
> 
> Today, the prov-o team agreed to continue on our path of including these inverse names in an appendix and defining the inverses in a separate file.
> 
> Next steps:
> 
> * prov-o team (and prov-wg) to review the inverse names at http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#names-of-inverse-properties
> * Tim to write appropriate narrative for justifying our decisions to define the inverse names separately.
> 
> Regards,
> Tim
> 
> On Apr 16, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote:
> 
>> The prov-o team agreed [1] to maintain a separate file that names the inverses of the ObjectProperties in PROV-O, which will be listed in an appendix but not defined in the PROV-O itself.
>> 
>> To get started with this, I have added a new annotation property "prov:inverse" that provides the local name of the inverse.
>> I've also defined the prov:inverse for prov:used and prov:wasGeneratedBy.
>> 
>> I will shortly generate the table for the appendix, which will be derived from these annotations.
>> 
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/7cfaab5c925d
>> 
>> -Tim
>> 
>> 
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2012-04-16
>> 
>> 
>> On Apr 8, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Daniel Garijo wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> there are some inverse properties now in the ontology (like generated), but we have avoided to 
>>> include them as much as we can to keep the model simple. If the creator of this issue is not happy
>>> with this resolution, I would like to ask him/her to provide some examples showing the need for the inverse
>>> properties, and why the current model is not enough for capturing them.
>>> 
>>> This issue is now pending review, and I propose to close it.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Daniel
>>> 
>>> 2011/8/25 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
>>> 
>>> ISSUE-83: Express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology
>>> 
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/83
>>> 
>>> Raised by:
>>> On product:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>