Re: The wasQuotedFrom relationship

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Timothy Lebo <> wrote:
>> Perhaps simply introducing the domain of Entity-subclass
>> prov:Quotation is sufficient to make this clear.
> We already have a prov:Quotation, which serves as the qualified form of wasQuotedFrom.

Argh.. I forgot about that. Well, having both might become confusing..
although prov:qualifiedQuotation would also have domain prov:Quote, I
think having both would not be good.

> Perhaps you mean something like "Quote", but adding any new class will put us back to LC, won't it?

I'm afraid so. :-(

> I think the broad use of wasQuotedFrom is a good reason to avoid a subclass of Enitty (e.g. Quote).
> wasQuotedFrom is simply another relation that one can express among Entities - the core of PROV.

OK, so I think the current situation is workable if we just tweak the
primer. The PROV-O description of prov:Quotation etc. are detailed
enough to clarify what it is for.

We don't imply other classes either, like Attributor subclass of Agent
etc because of a wasAttributedTo, and for some folks enforcing a new
class could put them off using the relationship because they are not
bothered looking up what the new class means.

>> should clarify if prov:wasAttributedTo on a prov:Quotation
> are you abusing here the existing prov:Quotation to be a subclass of Entity (i.e, Quote)?

No, I just forgot about the existing one. :)  The prov:Quotation is
also a confusing name in a way, but it covers the 'act/state of
quoting' in a way rather than the Quote itself (the passage). (We've
discussed this before).

>> should show
>> who uttered the original quote, who chose to cut it out and use it as
>> a quotation, or both.)
> Which PROV covers.

PROV can cover a lot of things, but I just hope we have not just made
a kind of "SGML of provenance" in that it allows anything and
recommends nothing, as then you are still just as confused after
reading the specs, and as a result everybody would end up using PROV

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

Received on Monday, 11 February 2013 16:28:03 UTC