- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:11:38 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org WG" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <24BC2F4F-4FD8-4EB7-B887-CF373CD5A73E@rpi.edu>
Ivan, >>> - The .owl extension goes to RDF/XML files, I presume. >> >> Yes. Are you suggesting to add .rdf in addition, or to replace .owl with .rdf? >> >> > > Actually, as I said below, I was suggesting to use extension-less URI-s, then populate /ns with .rdf and .owl (with identical content) and .ttl for a turtle version. I think that is what we have already. Agreed. > > >>> I wonder whether we should not use extension-less URI-s everywhere, eg, http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-20120724, and let conneg work to choose among RDF/XML or turtle versions. >> >> >> That is what I would prefer. But I think we're bending certain ways to help the bad tooling that is out there. >> The tradeoff that is in place is to point to the extension less URIs using specializationOf. > > You mean that is what you will do (at the moment, all the URI-s have an extension) I meant that I would prefer to not use extension-less URI-s everywhere and let conneg work. Are you saying to just do it that way? >> I can try it on Protege. We could find someone to try it on TopBraid Composer. What others? >> > > Pellet, at the minimum, but also browsers like TimBl's tabulator (although I suspect tabulator is fine, it will do conneg) > > I started a list at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#Tools_to_check_conneg_with -Tim >>> >>> On Nov 20, 2012, at 10:25 , Timothy Lebo wrote: >>> >>>> Ivan, prov-wg, OWL-in-practice gurus, and anyone concerned with the "prov ns concatenation" issue, >>>> >>>> I've staged the prov-o ontology files to go into /ns: >>>> >>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/ontology/releases/CR-prov-o-20121211/ns >>>> >>>> The directory contains the files for {prov, inverses} \cross {versioned, unversioned} \cross {rdf/xml, turtle} >>>> >>>> Each of the two ontologies (provo, inverses) has a owl:versionIRI, prov:wasRevisionOf, and prov:specializationOf, i.e., >>>> >>>> from provo http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/de8cda493917/ontology/releases/CR-prov-o-20121211/ns/prov-o.ttl#l30 : >>>> >>>> 30 <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov# >>>>> >>>> >>>> 31 a owl:Ontology ; >>>> 37 owl:versionIRI <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-20121211.owl >>>>> ; >>>> >>>> 38 :specializationOf <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o.owl >>>>> ; >>>> >>>> 39 :wasRevisionOf <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-20120724.owl> . >>>> >>>> and from inverses http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/de8cda493917/ontology/releases/CR-prov-o-20121211/ns/prov-o-inverses.ttl#l7 : >>>> >>>> 7 <> a owl:Ontology; >>>> 11 owl:versionIRI <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-inverses-20121211.owl >>>>> ; >>>> >>>> 12 prov:wasRevisionOf <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-inverses-20120724.owl >>>>> ; >>>> >>>> 13 prov:specializationOf <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-inverses.owl> . >>>> >>>> >>>> The PROV HTML points to the "unversioned" OWL files, specifically: >>>> >>>> [[ >>>> The OWL encoding of the PROV Ontology is available here (http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o.owl) >>>> ]] >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> [[ >>>> For convenience, this file (http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-inverses.owl) lists the resulting inverse properties. >>>> ]] >>>> >>>> >>>> I believe from this setup that consumers will be able to: >>>> * recognize when the OWL encoding was updated (via a new owl:versionIRI), >>>> * find the previous version (via wasRevisionOf), and >>>> * find the latest version at any point in the future from their current copy of the OWL encoding (specializationOf). >>>> >>>> 1) Do you agree? Is this an acceptable arrangement? >>>> >>>> >>>> 2) Looking ahead to the "namespace concatenation" [1], I would expect that I should change the URIs for the "provo" and "inverses" ontologies, to something like: >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o# >>>> and >>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o-inverses# >>>> >>>> Does that sound reasonable? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Tim >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvNamespaceManagement#Solution_2.2_Use_owl:import_and_return_full_merge_of_PROV-O_and_all_Notes >>>>
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2012 18:12:02 UTC