- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 11:43:37 -0500
- To: Stephen Cresswell <stephen.cresswell@tso.co.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Stephen, Did you mention property chains in our telecon? If so, would you mind adding an example to the collection [1] that illustrates your concern for the "directionality" of the current properties? I added a new section [2] to the directory conventions to handle applying inference and querying their results. Thanks, Tim [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Category:PROV_example [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_examples_-_directory_conventions#Inference On Mar 3, 2012, at 11:28 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-277 (TLebo): Supporting property chains [Ontology] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/277 > > Raised by: Stephen Cresswell > On product: Ontology > > During our group telecon, someone (Stephen Cresswell?) mentioned a concern that the directionality of some properties in prov-o would inhibit the use of property chains. > > Although "directionality" can be handled with owl:inverses, we are not including many inverses in prov-o for brevity (however, we are maintaining a component at [1]). Although "anyone" can define their own inverse of a prov-o property to achieve their property chains, this will inhibit interoperability. > > > [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/ontology/components/inverses.ttl > > > >
Received on Saturday, 3 March 2012 16:44:08 UTC