- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 08:55:54 -0400
- To: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
prov-wg,
When modeling Dictionaries, PROV-O had a straightforward way to model KeyValuePairs:
[
a prov:KeyValuePair;
prov:key "goalie";
prov:value :joe_the_tank;
]
Then, DM introduced the reserved property "value" to do things like:
entity(ex:in, [prov:value="abcd"])
entity(ex:out, [prov:value=4])
activity(ex:len, [prov:type="string-length"])
used(ex:len,ex:in)
wasGeneratedBy(ex:out,ex:len)
wasDerivedFrom(ex:out,ex:in)
DM's "value" property is exactly how rdf:value has been used in the past decade:
:parameter_1
a prov:Entity;
rdf:value 1024;
.
but we wanted to reestablish prov:value because rdf:value's definition was "a bit" cloudy.
So, we end up with:
:parameter_1
a prov:Entity;
prov:value 1024;
.
Unfortunately, the KeyValuePair's value collides with the DM's new value (rdf:value).
So, we could:
1) relax prov:value's domain from KeyValuePair to Entity
This would allow us to use prov:value in both KeyValuePairs as well as arbitrary "number entities".
2) Rename DM's "value" to "chars", inspired by cnt:chars from
http://www.w3.org/TR/Content-in-RDF10/#ContentAsTextClass
Which of these options would the group prefer?
Thanks,
Tim
ISSUE-363
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 12:56:34 UTC