Re: The wasQuotedFrom relationship

On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
> The use of the property implies that X is a quotation, by the definition of the property.
> The domain of the property is not constrained because it wasn't necessary -- Entity is sufficient.

>>  If you see “X wasQuotedFrom Y” and you do not know that X is a quotation,
> You **DO** know that X is a quotation, simply by the fact that it wasQuotedFrom something.
> Chuck's assumption here is invalid, so the remaining argument does not work.

Perhaps simply introducing the domain of Entity-subclass
prov:Quotation is sufficient to make this clear.  It would perhaps
seem odd to have the prov:wasQuotedFrom relationship alone, as it's
quite specific provenance that you perhaps did not expect to find in
PROV. We have however agreed that it could be reused beyond the
textual citations from books, etc - for instance, from my domain:

<http://example.com/workflow> a prov:Entity, :Workflow ;
    dcterms:hasPart :component1, :component2 .

<http://example.com/workflow#component1> a prov:Entity, :Component,
    prov:wasQuotedFrom <http://example.com/otherWorkflow> ;
    prov:alternateOf <http://example.com/otherWorkflow#component3> .


Here we just want to say that I've taken some part #component3 from
<http://example.com/otherWorkflow> and copied it (somewhat verbatim)
to our <http://example.com/workflow>.


A key property of a quotation is where it was from
(prov:wasQuotedFrom), another would be who it's attributed to (we
should clarify if prov:wasAttributedTo on a prov:Quotation should show
who uttered the original quote, who chose to cut it out and use it as
a quotation, or both.)

A quotation is also usually part of something else - but if we were to
recommend say dcterms:isPartOf for this, then we might also have to
clarify if a prov:Quotation is a particular quotation somewhere else.

Ie. is ("To be or not to be" as quoted in a blog post by Stian is a
different prov:Quotation from "To be or not to be" in a tweet by
Stian) , or if it is that selection of an original, no matter who is
doing the quoting. (Ie. "To be or not to be" in my blog post,  in a
tweet, in another book, and in a play could all be the same
prov:Quotation instance). I would tend towards the first, which would
make prov:wasAttributedTo to the original author trickier, or even
just let it be open (allow both styles) - but then not say anything
about part-of.

-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester

Received on Monday, 11 February 2013 11:08:29 UTC