- From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:41:10 +0000
- To: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|e0d3873e2a32ad38bb44df05b5001160p1OBfC08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|512B4DD6>
Hi Daniel and Kai,
Thanks for revising the document.
Two comments ahead of my review.
1. dct:type owl:equivalentProperty prov:type
prov:type does not exist! It's not a property in prov-o. We use
rdf:type instead.
2. I still don't like the idea that dct:replaces maps to
prov:wasInfluencedBy.
One of the reasons is that we recommend not to use this relation
but its subproperties.
So, if we can't find a subproperty of wasInfluencedBy that is
suitable for the mapping, I believe
it is better to acknowledge that dct:replaces does not map to prov,
rather than shoehorn it
into wasInfluencedBy.
This said, I am not convinced by your "catalog counter-example". To
me, you have two
entities, with a fixed aspect "belonging to the catalog", and the
more recent one, I feel, can
be derived from the previous one, in the sense that the previous
one was selected to be
removed, and replaced by the new one in the catalog.
so, e2 dct:replaces e1 is OK to be mapped to
e2 prov:wasDerivedFrom e1
furthermore
e2 prov:wasGeneratedBy a1
a1 a Activity
rdfs:label "select and replace activity"
Furthermore, as a1 generates e2, e1 is no longer in the catalog
(or e1 is at a different position in the catalog),
we could even say:
e1 prov:wasInvalidatedBy a1
Cheers,
Luc
<http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#wasInfluencedBy>
--
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 Monday, 25 February 2013 11:41:42 UTC