Re: PROV-ISSUE-321 (dgarijo): Instances of involvements can be expressed without a subclass. [Ontology]

Luc,

It is true that:

:blah a prov:Involvement .

is a valid statement in prov-o.

Since this issue was raised, all Involvements were "flattened" into ActivityInvolvement, EntityInvolvement, and AgentInvolvement -- each of which is a subclass of Involvement.
This structure is the foundation of qualifications, and I am concerned that remove it will reduce understandability and thus adoption.

I believe this concern was also aligned with the "lose" prov:qualified property that could point at any Involvement.
With prov:qualified replaced by its sub properties with specific ranges to prov:Usage, etc., is this issue less of a concern?

Thanks,
Tim



On Mar 14, 2012, at 8:37 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:

> PROV-ISSUE-321 (dgarijo): Instances of involvements can be expressed without a subclass. [Ontology]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/321
> 
> Raised by: Luc Moreau
> On product: Ontology
> 
> The ontology allows for instances of involvements to be 
> expressed, without specifying its subclass (Usage, Generation, etc). This is not aligned with the data model.
> 
> 
> 
>