Another prov-o comment/question

(I have not found yet the semantics document, I am not sure whether what I write makes sense...)

Looking at the Prov-o and the qualified terms. Taking the first time in the list, ie, qualifiedUsage. Isn't it correct that, at least conceptually, if I have 

ex:E a prov:Entity;
  prov:qualifiedUsage [
    a prov:Usage ;
    prov:entity ex:E
  ] .

then, again conceptually, I would expect something like

ex:E prov:used ex:E .

to be 'present'. It strikes me that this is exactly what the OWL 2 property chains do (and those are still OWL RL), by saying:

(prov:qualifiedUsage prov:entity) rdfs:subPropertyOf prov:used .

Isn't it worth adding it to the OWL ontology? Or do I miss something here?


P.S. I use Turtle for these. Please, please, pretty please, would it be possible to generate a decent Turtle version of the OWL Ontology? :-)

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
mobile: +31-641044153

Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 10:08:01 UTC