- 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