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

Re: prov:Dictionary example - without the specs

From: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 10:39:27 +0100
Message-ID: <CAANah+EOwWSr3L17EyyL1XmVhkJkuvyJdAnKriuN7zRak92M5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Tim,

It looks good to me.
We should note however that we cannot explicitly specify
membership completeness, in the sense that we are not be able to assert
that the members specified using hadMember are the only members of the
dictionary (or collection). If we are happy with this, then what you are
suggesting makes sense to me.

khalid


On 5 June 2012 06:25, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:

> prov-wg,
>
> I tried my hand at modeling the provenance of the U.S. Supreme Court's
> current membership, and its derivation to it's first membership.
>
> The wiki page for the example is at:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Eg-34-us-supreme-court-membership
>
> In an attempt to take a fresh look at how we're modeling dictionaries (and
> collections?), I didn't reference PROV-DM, PROV-O, or any other examples or
> documentation -- I just tried to describe the subject matter.
>
>
> How does it look?
>
> I'd like to move PROV-O (and DM, if it needs tweaking) towards this kind
> of modeling and naming.
>
> Discussion and feedback encouraged.
>
> Later today, I'll try to start from scratch on the DM and work through the
> current PROV-O modeling, and then the recent threads on this topic.
> I hope by then we can converge on a satisfactory design.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2012 09:42:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:16 UTC