- 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