W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > January 2013

PROV-ISSUE-617: Why are some prov-constraint inferences in prov-o, but not others? [Ontology]

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:23:04 +0000
Message-Id: <E1TyPZw-000276-No@tibor.w3.org>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
PROV-ISSUE-617: Why are some prov-constraint inferences in prov-o, but not others? [Ontology]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/617

Raised by: Timothy Lebo
On product: Ontology

an extension of ISSUE-611 lingers in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2013Jan/0016.html

Our comment was not regarding encoding of the constraints in OWL
(which is not possible to do completely anyway) but about encoding the
inferences in OWL. Right now, it looks like some of the inferences
from PROV Constraints document is included in PROV-O. Specifically,
Inference 15 (influence-inference) [1] and Inference 20
(specialization-alternate-inference) [2] are included in PROV-O as
subPropertyOf axioms. But other inferences defined in this document
are not included in PROV-O which is a little confusing. For example,
Inference 12 (revision-is-alternate-inference) [3] suggests another
subPropertyOf relation (wasRevisionOf subPropertyOf alternateOf) but
this is not in PROV-O. If the WG chooses to encode some of the
inferences in PROV-O but not others, we would like to understand the
rationale behind this decision.
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2013 16:23:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:28 UTC