- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 15:35:40 +0200
- To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi TIm, This looks cool. I was wondering if really what you want is "class can be used with relationship" cross reference? Or would this be too much? thanks Paul On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 8:08 PM, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: > wg, > > More cross referencing was added to link "less direct" relationships between > classes and properties. > > > > For example, > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/3acc7d101d59/ontology/Overview.html#Usage > > now shows: > > a domain of prov:hadRole parent is in domain of prov:atTime prov:entity > > > > This should help the use of, in particular, the Involvement subclasses. > > Some questions: > > 1) Are these new cross references useful? > > 2) Are there other cross references that you would find useful? > > Thanks, > Tim > > > > On Apr 16, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > > PROV-ISSUE-350 (xref-with-unions): cross references with union domains fail > [PROV-O HTML] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/350 > > Raised by: Timothy Lebo > On product: PROV-O HTML > > Anything with a union domain needs to be fixed in the cross reference > script. > > e.g. > http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#hadActivity > has > > has domain > > prov:Involvement > TODO: one of a few classes. > > > > > > > -- -- 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 Saturday, 19 May 2012 13:36:09 UTC