- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 15:34:36 -0400
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <78B27724-136F-4936-86B3-17C976A62898@rpi.edu>
(since identifiers are getting confusing, I'm rewriting my email and reorganizing the order of examples from top to bottom). On Jun 6, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > On Jun 6, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: Luc/DM's prov-n: >>> bundle tool:analysis01 # found at http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd6-contextualization.html >>> contextualizationOf(tool:Bob1, ex:Bob, ex:run1) >>> endBundle would get encoded in prov-o as: >>> tool:analysis01 { >>> tool:Bob1 >>> prov:specializationOf [ >>> a prov:Entity; prov:ContextualizedEntity; >>> prov:identifier ex:Bob; >>> prov:inContext ex:run1; >>> ]; >>> . >>> } read "tool:Bob1 in tool:analysis01 is a specialization of the thing with identifier ex:Bob over in bundle ex:run1". would get re-encoded to prov-n as: >> contextualizationOf(anonymous, ex:Bob, ex:run1) >> alternateOf(tool:Bob1, anonymous ) Tim's response: > Given your mapping back, I think I'm still okay. > > In my mapping, I'd just _name_ my ContextualizedEntity and use alternateOf instead of specializationOf. > > But why wouldn't it be specializationOf? Then, we get to "inherit" the characterization, which seemed to be your intent from the beginning. > > Any way it falls from here, I think this is close enough for me to be content. -Tim
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 19:35:09 UTC