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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-277 (TLebo): Supporting property chains [Ontology]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 11:43:37 -0500
Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <86765125-1A3D-4D6B-872B-61D0DE74F0B5@rpi.edu>
To: Stephen Cresswell <stephen.cresswell@tso.co.uk>

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.


[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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:09 UTC