W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2007

Re: In RDF what is the best practice to represent data provenance (source)?

From: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 17:22:19 -0800
Message-Id: <56724DAD-7DDF-40E2-8F14-F79461EA280D@reading.ac.uk>
Cc: SW-forum list <semantic-web@w3.org>
To: "Chris Richard" <chris.richard@gmail.com>
On  20 Jan 2007, at 11:35 AM, Chris Richard wrote:

> Is there any way to represent this type of relation amongst  
> predicates with OWL or a related language? I see this same  
> modelling technique used in the following tagging vocabulary:  
> http://www.holygoat.co.uk/owl/redwood/0.1/tags/tags.n3 where  
> resources can be tagged by relating them directly to tags with  
> "taggedWithTag" (Resource, Tag) or indirectly with "tag" (Resource,  
> Tagging) and "associatedTag" (Tagging, Tag).
> In this case, Foo taggedWithTag Bar
> is shorthand for:
> Foo tag _:a
> _:a associatedTag Bar
> Hopefully I'm not way off the mark...

I opted to add this implication in the ontology; I explicitly declare  

x tag y
y associatedTag z
=> x taggedWithTag z

so that software using the ontology can safely make this assumption.  
I see that more as a rules thing than an OWL thing, which is why this  
isn't formally described anywhere.

Received on Sunday, 21 January 2007 01:22:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:44:59 UTC