Re: ISSUE-385: hasProvenanceIn: finding a solution

Hi Tim,

I didn't exactly understand it that way:

bundle b1
    entity(general1)
    activity(a1)
    used(a1,general1)
endBundle

bundle b2
    entity(specific1)
    activity(a2)
    used(a2,specific1)
    specializationOf(specific1,general1)
endBundle

bundle b3
    entity(e)
    contextualizationOf(e, general1, bundle1) // e presents the facet of 
general1 in bundle1
    contextualizationOf(e, specific1, bundle2) // e also presents the 
facet of specific1 in bundle2
endBundle

In your rdf encoding,
"tool:Bob1 in tool:analysis01 is a specialization of the thing with 
identifier ex:Bob over in bundle ex:run1".
becomes
"e in b3 is a specialization of the thing with identifier specific1 in 
bundle2" (1)
and
"e in b3 is a specialization of the thing with identifier general1 in 
bundle1" (2)

I don't think that (1) holds since "e presents the facet of general1 in 
bundle1"

Thoughts?

Luc




On 06/06/12 20:34, Timothy Lebo wrote:
> (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
>
>
>