Re: PROV-ISSUE-479: cite TriG for examples [Ontology]

Tim,

I'm not sure if I responded to this.  It broadly confirms what I expected, and 
I'm happy with this.

#g
--

On 05/11/2012 16:23, Timothy Lebo wrote:
> Graham,
>
> You raised issue 479 and in response the prov-o team:
>
> * removed the use of TriG in examples where possible and
> * added the following statement to the beginning of the cross reference section:
>
> [[
> "Most examples shown in this cross reference are encoded using the Turtle RDF serialization. When an example requires a prov:Bundle, it may use the [TRIG] syntax. Although this document does not specify how to encode Bundles in RDF, TriG's named graph construct is used only to illustrate the concept."
> ]]
>
> The following informative reference is also provided:
>
> [TRIG]
> Henry S. Thompson; et al. The TriG Syntax. modified 30 July 2007, accessed November 05 2012 URL: http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/trig/
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-479_.28citing_Trig.29
>
> Could you let us know if that satisfies your concern?
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 5:28 AM, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:
>
>> I think I forgot my periods.
>>
>> It should be
>>
>> <>  a prov:Bundle;
>> prov:generatedAtTime "2012-05-24T10:30:00"^^xsd:dateTime;
>>     prov:wasAttributedTo :Bob.
>>
>> my:report1
>>     a my:Report, prov:Entity.
>>
>> So there are no quads.
>>
>> The <> refers to the document (or base url).
>>
>> So maybe for all clarity we should ensure that the base url is clearly
>> a document eg. http://www.example.com/example.ttl
>>
>> What your doing is just saying that the current document is a bundle.
>>
>> cheers
>> Paul
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu> wrote:
>>> Hi Paul and Ivan,
>>> Thanks for the responses!
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would suggest the following for modifying the example:
>>>>
>>>> ## A provenance file located a http://example.com/provbundle1
>>>>
>>>> @base:     <http://example.com/provbundle1> .
>>>> @prefix my:      <http://example.com/my#> .
>>>> @prefix prov:    <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
>>>>
>>>> <>  a prov:Bundle;
>>>>    prov:generatedAtTime "2012-05-24T10:30:00"^^xsd:dateTime;
>>>>    prov:wasAttributedTo :Bob;
>>>>
>>>> my:report1
>>>> a my:Report, prov:Entity;
>>>
>>>
>>> I may be missing something, but I interpret the above example as:
>>> 1. <> my:report1 a my:Report . and <> my:report1 a prov:Entity. - are quads
>>> instead of triples?
>>>
>>> Did you mean to have an explicit predicate linking statements (reports) to
>>> the bundle
>>>
>>> <bundle1>
>>>    a prov:Bundle ;
>>>    <contains> my:report1, my:report2 ;
>>>    prov:generatedAtTime "2012-05-24T10:30:00"^^xsd:dateTime .
>>>
>>> with rest of the statements from your example following?
>>>
>>> ("contains" being a locally defined predicate.)
>>>
>>> or both bundle1 and report1 to be bundles? - in that case both would be same
>>> as any other entity?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Satya
>>>
>>>>
>>>> my:version "1";
>>>> prov:generatedAtTime "2012-05-24T10:00:01"^^xsd:dateTime;
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you want to get really fancy, you can switch the bases in the
>>>> middle of the example to talk about multiple files (i.e. bundles).
>>>>
>>>> Does that make sense?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 11 Sep 2012, at 02:53, Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> I am following up on this issue for prov-o.
>>>>>
>>>>> I looked up the turtle WD http://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/ and could not
>>>>> find an
>>>>> appropriate construct for representing a prov bundle. Trig seems to be
>>>>> only
>>>>> way to represent a RDF named graph, unless we want to use a blank node
>>>>> for a
>>>>> bundle (http://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/#unlabeled-bnodes)? The RDF WG also
>>>>> seems to be still discussing the issue
>>>>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-rdf11-concepts-20120605/#section-dataset).
>>>>>
>>>>> Hence, do we resolve this issue by referring to Trig explicitly in the
>>>>> prov-o document (for now)?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the idea was *not* to refer TriG explicitly and, as Paul
>>>>> suggests,
>>>>> use different (Turtle) documents for the bundles for now. TriG is
>>>>> especially
>>>>> problematic as a reference: there are references that the community uses
>>>>> here and there and which do not even exist any more:-(
>>>>>
>>>>> That being said, the RDF WG may be in a better shape than we look to the
>>>>> outside, and it is not impossible that a TriG document will be published
>>>>> before the end of the year. Ie, we may make the editorial change of
>>>>> using
>>>>> TriG later in the process (the examples are non normative anyway). We
>>>>> should
>>>>> go for the safe option in my view, which is Paul's proposal in my view.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Satya
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we can do that, it would certainly be fool proof for now...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:56 , Paul Groth wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For this issue, I wonder if the best approach would be to give
>>>>>>> examples of bundles that don't use trig. Then, we would be turtle
>>>>>>> compatible and wouldn't have confusion when whatever extended syntax
>>>>>>> comes out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We can just show it as two separate documents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2012, at 20:21 , Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PROV-ISSUE-479: cite TriG for examples [Ontology]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/479
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>>>>>>>>> On product: Ontology
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The syntax used in the examples should be mentioned (it is TriG
>>>>>>>>> http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/trig/).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Per Graham in email
>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/mid/5023A271.90500@ninebynine.org :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ref: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-o-20120724/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (Currently, I'm posing this as a question I need to understand
>>>>>>>>> order
>>>>>>>>> to reason coherently about aspects of provenance expressed in RDF,
>>>>>>>>> but I may
>>>>>>>>> also raise it as a formal issue.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can't see a specification or citation for the syntax used for
>>>>>>>>> examples in PROV-O.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This may seem like a trivial point, but I think it's a serious
>>>>>>>>> omission.  In particular, I'm trying to interpret how the mentionOf
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> bundle structure plays out when represented in RDF and, while I can
>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>> guesses, that's not a sound basis for interpretation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Most of the examples appear to conform with Turtle
>>>>>>>>> (http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/), but there are some
>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-o-20120724/#Bundle) that do not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I put in one of my earlier comments, it is probably wise to refer
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> the current RDF WG Working Draft, too, in the references:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Turtle is currently in Last Call. It may not win the race and become
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> Rec before Prov does, but citing it at least as a work in progress
>>>>>>>> makes a
>>>>>>>> lot of sense. (And, who knows, Turtle might become Rec earlier.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The TriG stuff is clearly not yet there and therefore the ...#Bundle
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> indeed illegal syntax.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because such examples given go beyond the current structure
>>>>>>>>> expressible as an RDF graph, I think some explanation should be
>>>>>>>>> provided
>>>>>>>>> about how these should be interpreted as RDF.  (E.g. "<id> {
>>>>>>>>> <turtle
>>>>>>>>> expression> }" could be presented as an RDF document on the web at
>>>>>>>>> URI
>>>>>>>>> "<id>".  If this reflects what is intended, then I think some
>>>>>>>>> further
>>>>>>>>> comment is needed about when it is valid to merge these graphs, or
>>>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>>> kinds of cross-bundle inferences are possible, because the PROV-O
>>>>>>>>> ontology
>>>>>>>>> alone can't express any of that.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not sure it is worth going down that route. For those one or
>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>> examples I think, for the time being, referring to TriG should be
>>>>>>>> fine. I
>>>>>>>> cannot predict whether the RDF WG may come up with a syntax in time;
>>>>>>>> I would
>>>>>>>> not bet on it...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (Most of this "processing model" concern goes away if we drop
>>>>>>>>> mentionOf.  But in order to understand how mentionOf plays out in
>>>>>>>>> the RDF
>>>>>>>>> representation of provenance, as described by the OWL ontology, I
>>>>>>>>> need to
>>>>>>>>> understand these details.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> #g
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----
>>>>>>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>>>>>>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>>>>>>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>>>>>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>> - The Network Institute
>>>>>>> VU University Amsterdam
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----
>>>>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>>>>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>>>>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>>>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> 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
>>>> - The Network Institute
>>>> VU University Amsterdam
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> 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
>> - The Network Institute
>> VU University Amsterdam
>>
>>
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 9 November 2012 04:05:49 UTC