- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 13:48:37 -0400
- To: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Jun, We were able to discuss the idea of timestamping prov.owl in our call today. If you look at: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/WD-prov-o-2012MMDD/ontology/ProvenanceOntology.owl you will see: <owl:versionInfo rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-o-2012MMDD"/> Since this is in the owl file, it will allow anyone with the file to know which working draft (or release) the owl file represents. I've added notes to [1] so that this will be done upon the future releases. Will this satisfy your needs? May we close the issue? Thanks, Tim [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#Steps_taken_for_LC On May 7, 2012, at 11:36 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > Jun, > > I am happy to help settle the versioning issues with the OWL ontology, > but I'm afraid that I'm not sure what your concerns are. > > We have three options: > > 1) hg tag the OWL file > 2) add to the prov-o html automation to reference the OWL version that it is documenting > 3) <> owl:versionURI > > Could you please clarify your concerns so that we can scope the effort to address them? > > Thanks, > Tim > > > On May 5, 2012, at 7:48 AM, Paul Groth wrote: > >> This seems good. Stian can you add it? >> >> Thanks >> Paul >> >> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk> wrote: >>> On 03/05/2012 11:02, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: >>>> Don't you think the OWL should contain something like >>>> >>>> <> owl:versionIRI >>>> <www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-o-20120501/ProvenanceOntology.owl> ? >>> >>> Stian, yes, we should also have that! >>> >>> -- Jun >>> >>>> >>>> I would +1 that as people like myself will download the OWL locally >>>> for processing with say Sesame-Elmo, and it later will be important to >>>> know which one it is based on. >>>> >>>> We just need to know the magic date to add it in advance. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Jun Zhao<jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk> wrote: >>>>> Hi Tim, >>>>> >>>>> I am happy with what we will do with the public release. >>>>> >>>>> And dealing with versioning for internal releases can wait if you are >>>>> overwhelmed by other commitment at the moment. >>>>> >>>>> -- Jun >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 02/05/2012 00:27, Tim Lebo wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Jun, >>>>>> >>>>>> The prov.owl will be "copied" to the official w3c website directory when >>>>>> the WD2 is published on Thursday, so there will be no question about what >>>>>> OWL file the HTML is talking about. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hopefully, the "dereferencability problem" (which paul took on and we >>>>>> asked Daniel to help with) will be addressed soon, which will provide the >>>>>> latest OWL when requesting the terms' URIs. >>>>>> >>>>>> If we want to be explicit about what version of the ontology the HTML is >>>>>> taking about, I can look into exposing that within every compiled draft up >>>>>> to LC that is due in a few weeks. But generally, these are always in sync >>>>>> because the ontology changes less frequently and the HTML is generated much >>>>>> more frequently. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Please let me know which aspects you need most, so that we can address the >>>>>> right issues soon. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Tim >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>> On May 1, 2012, at 11:38, Provenance Working Group Issue >>>>>> Tracker<sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> PROV-ISSUE-371 (junzhao): timestamped provo.owl [PROV-O HTML] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/371 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Raised by: Jun Zhao >>>>>>> On product: PROV-O HTML >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can we talk about when or whether we will have snapshots for our >>>>>>> ontology, like ProvenanceOntology-20120430.owl? Or achieve similar >>>>>>> functionality via other mechanisms? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because our ontology is still work in progress, it is important to have >>>>>>> the right ontology content associated with each prov-o spec public release >>>>>>> or even work draft. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think this would be something really nice to have at least for this >>>>>>> upcoming public release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am happy to discuss more on this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Jun >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) >> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ >> Assistant Professor >> Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group >> Artificial Intelligence Section >> Department of Computer Science >> VU University Amsterdam >> >> > > >
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 17:49:08 UTC