- From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:44:16 +0100
- To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- CC: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|cbdd25c10fffb529e751ebcd27218b3ao9MAiK08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|508666F0>
Hi Tim, Thanks for the explanation. It is now clear that the document reflects what was intended. I have a comment/question and suggestion. 1. We came across this issue by writing a converter from rdf to other representations of PROV, and making use of the "ontology compiler" elmo. The resulting code allows us to write ex:e2 prov:hadQualifiedDerivation ex:d1 ex:d1 prov:hadRole ex:r The appendix indicates that the multiple RDFS domains and ranges [RDF-SCHEMA] for a property are interpreted as an intersection. Are you saying that these statements are *not* consistent with an OWL2 DL/Full profile of prov-o, but are consistent with an OWL2 RL profile of prov-o? 2. Given the importance of this appendix, I find it really buried. The document is designed to allow browsing, but in section https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/Overview.html#hadRole there is no indication that one should read this appendix to fully understand prov:hadRole. Can we add a forwarding pointer to the appendix next to prov:Influence, in the domain of prov:hadRole? Thanks, Luc On 10/22/2012 08:18 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > prov-wg, > > On Oct 8, 2012, at 8:54 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker > <sysbot+tracker@w3.org <mailto:sysbot+tracker@w3.org>> wrote: > >> PROV-ISSUE-568 (hadRole-domain): domain of prov:hadRole [Ontology] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/568 >> >> Raised by: Luc Moreau >> On product: Ontology >> >> >> The definition of hadRole in prov-o >> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#hadRole >> >> lists >> prov:Association or prov:End or prov:Generation or prov:Invalidation >> or prov:Start or prov:Usage >> in its domain, which is what prov-dm states, >> but also >> prov:Influence >> which is not compatible with prov-dm. > > > It depends on what is meant by "compatible". > > The appendix at http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#prov-o-owl-profile > lists the "OWL-RL violation" of hadRole's domain, > > prov:hadRole <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#hadRole> rdfs:domain [ > (prov:Association prov:End prov:Generation prov:Invalidation > prov:Start prov:Usage) ] > > > and follows by providing a more general assertion that suits (and > informs) OWL RL: > > prov:hadRole <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#hadRole> rdfs:domain > prov:Influence <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#Influence> > > The appendix also clarifies in narrative the meaning of rdfs:domain > that can be mis-interpreted in other modeling paradigms (and "prov-dm"): > > The more general domain should not be interpreted as saying, e.g., > "prov:hadActivity can be used with any prov:Influence", but as > "Anything using prov:hadActivity is (at least) a prov:Influence". > > The appendix also states that "some property domains or ranges have > also been defined with the closest common superclass for the classes > in the [OWL-RL-violating] union" > > > Tim > -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 09:44:50 UTC