Re: The wasQuotedFrom relationship

On Feb 20, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:

> I don't want to go there now, really.. but it depends on how you found
> that provenance trace. If you were querying where I might find quotes
> from the article, I would expect to find the blog.

That's fine; the provenance about retrieving the blog would be a separate issue.
When that is done, one could query for which blogs contain the quote.

> 
> But if I was to do this now, I would just use RDFa in a blockquote
> inside the blog post, and then everything is fine.

That is part of the approach I was proposing.

-Tim

> 
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
>> 
>> On Feb 20, 2013, at 5:29 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> Agree that hadMember would not be good, making a blog post a collection is
>> quite confusing,  if not wrong.
>> 
>> If we need to say something, we should just relate them with
>> dcterms:hasPart, as we (perhaps sadly)
>> decided to not cover entity partOf entity in PROV.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Do we need any relation between the blog and the quotel?
>> Since the blog contains the quote (i.e., the quote is mentioned in the
>> resource representation of the blog), all that is needed is that the quote
>> be annotated with where it was quoted from.
>> The quote being part of the blog is implicit and inherent.
>> 
>> -Tim
>> 
>> 
>> However I think for the primer we are fine unless someone outside asks for
>> that relation.
>> 
>> --
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> myGrid team, University of Manchester
>> http://soiland-reyes.com/stian/work
>> 
>> On 20 Feb 2013 00:02, "Miles, Simon" <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Stian,
>>> 
>>> Yes, I also thought about expressing the containment relation between the
>>> blog post and quote. I noticed that you and Tim used dcterms:hasPart to
>>> express this in this mail thread. We also have prov:hadMember, which might
>>> be more appropriate, as the fact that the quote is part of the blog entry is
>>> a possibly temporary past state (implied in the primer example by the fact
>>> that the article it quotes from is updated), which dcterms:hasPart doesn't
>>> obviously capture. Also, we recommend dcterms:hasPart for relating PROV
>>> activities, whereas these are entities. On the other hand, using
>>> prov:hadMember would make the blog entry a prov:Collection, and it is not
>>> the most intuitive example of a collection for a primer.
>>> 
>>> In the end, the implications seemed too complicated for a primer,
>>> especially as the blog entry entity is not itself used anywhere else in the
>>> example, so I left it out. There might be an intuitive, succinct and
>>> unambiguous way to introduce it, though, if we thought it useful.
>>> 
>>> thanks,
>>> Simon
>>> 
>>> Dr Simon Miles
>>> Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics
>>> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
>>> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
>>> 
>>> Mapping Dublin Core (Attribution Metadata) to the Open Provenance Model:
>>> http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1386/
>>> 
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: stian@mygrid.org.uk [stian@mygrid.org.uk] on behalf of Stian
>>> Soiland-Reyes [soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk]
>>> Sent: 19 February 2013 23:29
>>> To: Miles, Simon
>>> Cc: pgroth@gmail.com; Timothy Lebo; public-prov-wg@w3.org Group WG
>>> Subject: Re: The wasQuotedFrom relationship
>>> 
>>> This reads well in the primer and in your response. The combination of
>>> ex:quoteInBlogEntry and prov:value here makes it quite obvious.  If we
>>> want to expand it more we could use html blockquote, id and RDFa
>>> argument.
>>> 
>>> An open question could be how we know that ex:quoteInBlogEntry is part
>>> of ( ex:blogPost ?)  , but as we just skim and don't mention the blog
>>> post I think we can get away with the current text. :-)   (It is kind
>>> of out of scope of PROV to define such kind of containment or
>>> belonging).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Miles, Simon <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Tim, Paul, Stian, all,
>>>> 
>>>> It is clear that, to resolve the issue discussed below, a "quote in blog
>>>> entry" entity needs to be introduced into the primer. I've constructed a
>>>> response below, based on your feedback. Please also the revised primer,
>>>> start of Section 3.9.
>>>> 
>>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html
>>>> 
>>>> Does this seem an adequate response to Chuck?
>>>> 
>>>> thanks,
>>>> Simon
>>>> 
>>>> ===
>>>> After discussion, we agree with you that the PROV primer was still
>>>> unclear,
>>>> or possibly just wrong, in the way it was implying wasQuotedFrom could
>>>> be
>>>> used. As you say, one would not say that "X was quoted from Y" if X was
>>>> not
>>>> a quotation. We still believe the relation itself, as defined in the
>>>> PROV
>>>> specifications, is correct and unambiguous.
>>>> 
>>>> We have revised the primer again following your suggestion of
>>>> introducing an
>>>> entity that is more clearly a quotation, ex:quoteInBlogEntry, and made
>>>> explicit the text actually quoted ("Smaller cities have more crime than
>>>> larger ones.")
>>>> 
>>>> With regards to wasQuotedFrom itself, we note that "X wasQuotedFrom Y"
>>>> implies that X is a quotation, and that this follows the same idea of
>>>> quotation as in HTML ("The blockquote element represents a section that
>>>> is
>>>> quoted from another source", HTML5). PROV does not provide a relation "X
>>>> was
>>>> quoted from in Y".
>>>> 
>>>> Please see the revised primer at the link below. The relevant text and
>>>> example are at the start of Section 3.9, as before.
>>>> 
>>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html
>>>> 
>>>> Do you believe this now addresses your concern?
>>>> ===
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Paul Groth [pgroth@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: 11 February 2013 20:50
>>>> To: Timothy Lebo
>>>> Cc: Stian Soiland-Reyes; Miles, Simon; public-prov-wg@w3.org Group WG
>>>> Subject: Re: The wasQuotedFrom relationship
>>>> 
>>>> Oh just saw that html5 defines blockquote as:
>>>> 
>>>> "The blockquote element represents a section that is quoted from another
>>>> source"
>>>> 
>>>> I think prov:wasQuotedFrom fits that definition perfectly.
>>>> 
>>>> cheers
>>>> Paul
>>>> 
>>>> P.S. We should write a blog post about how to use prov with html5
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 11, 2013, at 11:27 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes
>>>>> <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 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
>>>>> differently.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yes, there's a risk that if we under specify that many will use it
>>>>> differently. But the WG is simply providing the core.
>>>>> As long as people are conforming to Activity and Entity, we should be
>>>>> okay…
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Tim
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
>>> School of Computer Science
>>> The University of Manchester
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
> School of Computer Science
> The University of Manchester
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2013 16:11:48 UTC