Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
PIL OWL Ontology Meeting 2012-07-16
From Provenance WG Wiki
Contents
Meeting Information
prov-wg - Modeling Task Force - OWL group telecon
- previous meeting
- date: 2012-07-16
- time: 12pm ET, 5pm GMT
- via Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference 695 ("OWL")
- wiki page: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2012-07-16
- titan page: http://titanpad.com/a6Msk8ONFq
- next meeting
Attendees
- Tim
- Stian
- David Corsar
- Satya
- Stephan (regrets)
- Khalid (regrets)
- Daniel (regrets)
- Jun (regrets)
Agenda
For the issues that you are assigned:
- describe the original concern
- describe any perspectives already expressed
- recommend next step, or propose a solution
Voting on Thursday to release PROV-O to public
ISSUES
All
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/83 prov:inverse local names
- narrative and design rationale http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#names-of-inverse-properties
- will have table http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/inverse-names.html <--- ALL: Are these inverse names okay?
- and cite http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/inverses.ttl
- Stian: "derivation's usage. same style on usage and generation on a Derivation's inverse."
- Stian/Daniel/Tim discussions on wiki
David
- started on the diagrams, the files are at http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/7c11a20b836e/ontology/diagram-history/2012-07-09-david
- I have done the diagram for the example under Fig 1, which was requested;
- I'm happy to continue working through those in the expanded terms today/tomorrow if that¹s ok?
- A diagram was also requested for after the first paragraph of 3.3, with another comment later regarding the same section focusing on rearranging the example/text; the raised editorial says "not sure how to resolve this" - I guess we should hold off doing a diagram until a decision is made?
TODO: Tim integrate into document and revisit David's points.
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/ontology/diagram-history/2012-07-09-david
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/9f0b37eaf74e/ontology/diagram-history/2012-07-09-david/expanded-terms-example-all.svg
- activity used something that was quoted from something that the activity generated
- :quote1, :publicationActivity1123
Jun
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/442 (what prov.owl terms can we omit in prov.html)
- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ahxrga9AQHb_dDBQV3ZyWEN6S2RXcWVZMzI0S0xKeEE
- focus is on sections 3.1 - 3.3
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/382 qualification section feedback
- 4th column of qualification tables is hard to understand (we're up to 6 now!)
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#description-qualified-terms
- Stephan: mouse over on the header (within style guidlines)
- TODO: what text to put into span title hover text that is there now?
- We can also do slightly nicer mouseover using CSS :hover http://www.w3schools.com/cssref/sel_hover.asp http://www.scientificpsychic.com/etc/css-mouseover.html
- 4th column of qualification tables is hard to understand (we're up to 6 now!)
- extra paragraph for "now that we've qualified, what can we do?" (right at the beginning of the section, after or before the cheat-sheet tables)
- activity, entity, agent, dictionary point to the objects being qualified
- hadActivity, hadGeneration, hadUsage hadPlan and hadRole provide the additional statements about the can-be-qualifeid properties, via their corresponding qualify classes or an involvement class
- TODO: Tim to make sure all are covered.
- rename prov:activity, prov:entity, prov:agent -> influencerAgent, influencingEntity, influencingActivity ?
- Tim: anybody have suggestions on rename?
- Stephan / Satya: too late to rename.
- Tim: postpone to list.
- extra paragraph for "now that we've qualified, what can we do?" (right at the beginning of the section, after or before the cheat-sheet tables)
Stian
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/349 [good] turtle examples in cross ref
- do the examples "fit the ontology"? TODO (CODE)
- David, Stian, Stephan, Tim will work on this as we go (no clear leader)
- Stian's report
- Just use something that makes sense for that example. Like http://example.org/car http://example.org/customer http://example.org/alice http://example.org/workingAtHome
- Stian: a bit long, log book on what he did. Lots of considerations came up.
- ... example called the same (e1, e1, e1).
- ... spelling mistakes
- TODO: do the renaming to avoid the collisions. TODO: Stian to coordinate the renaming, assign them, coordinate.
- TODO: do as a whole, then backtrack to the examples.
Satya
- we need blog post by 24 July - takers?
- TODO: Satya to lead, ask Paul, cc. Stian and Tim.
Tim
- general reference to http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#prov-dm-to-prov-o-and-prov-n outside of each cross reference entry.
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#prov-dm-to-prov-o-and-prov-n (mention named graph? -- but we want to be agnostic)
- RDFa is bunk
- Stephan review's
- Plan: We do not mention in Section 3.3 that Plan is a subclass of Entity (and we do mention that Bundle and Collection are subclasses of Entity).
- Stephan: we give all but plan, but do not mention it in 3.2. One could infer that Plan is not an entity.
- ... we don't say why Plan is an Entity. One could describe the provenance of a Plan. So it's not always a qulfieid term.
- TODO: Tim add the one-liner for Plan in 3.2, add to Figure 2. "one can describe provenancne of a plan".
- We may want to introduce Plan as a specialization of Entity in Section 3.2 and include it in Figure 2.
- Role: I think including role information in the Qualified Association example in section 3.3 would help the narrative. Otherwise, fine.
- Stephan: dind't see Role in section 3.3. Along with HadPlan, add a Role.
- TODO: Tim to add hadRole to the example, plus the narrative of the example.
- Plan: We do not mention in Section 3.3 that Plan is a subclass of Entity (and we do mention that Bundle and Collection are subclasses of Entity).
- review of prov-o july 3 2012 for last call (and its 104 raised feedback points)
- qualifiedXXX: shouldn't they be inverseFunctional? (luc's comment)
- Otherwise, this would allow for a given Influence instance, to be a qualified Influence for multiple subjects. This is not intended.
- The qualified pattern is prov-o specific. It was inverse functional before, but I think this characteristic was incorrectly removed.
- Stephan: not against it, but goal is to refelct the DM, so the DM should assert that it is inverse functional.
- influencer: should it be functional: there is only one influencer per qualified pattern instance, isn't there.
- hadPlan: is functional; hadUsage: is functional; hadGeneration: is functional; hadActivity: is functional
- TODO: Satya to help skim through, Stephan to skim but busy, David.
- qualifiedXXX: shouldn't they be inverseFunctional? (luc's comment)
- cross references links to DM, constraints, and N. (remove all but DM?)
- satya: remove to prov-n
- ... for constraints
- stephan: fine with removign to prov-n, since we're not trying to model the constraints
- david: sounds reasonable, constraints
- cross references links to DM, constraints, and N. (remove all but DM?)
- diagrams for examples (what is PROV conventions?)
- TODO: David to give it a shot.
- diagrams for examples (what is PROV conventions?)
- Luc's scan
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/examples/eg-24-prov-o-html-examples/rdf/create/rdf <97 chars
- property_pair.ttl
- property_qualifiedQuotation.ttl
- class_Quotation.ttl
- property_wasQuotedFrom.ttl
- class_Collection.ttl
- property_invalidated.ttl
- property_value.ttl
- property_hadMember.ttl
- property_hadQuoter.ttl
- property_hadQuoted.ttl
- class_completeCollection.ttl
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/336 pre-WD2 feedback
- These are editorial, and thus second priority before LC.
- prov:category and prov:component should be URIs, not literals (requires code, many filename dependencies across systems)
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#description-starting-point-terms
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#description-expanded-terms
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#description-qualified-terms
- Tim asked Luc to rename the following:
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#component1
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#component2
- https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/388 (tools and demos)
- https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/389 extensions to prov-o
Stephan
- Encouragement to link prov.owl to DM as much as possible.
- reviewing Role, Plan, and hadRole in gdoc
Khalid
- highlighting focus terms in prov-o examples
- with strong HTML elements
Daniel
- The only 2 things that I have detected is that in section 3.2 there is no example for mention and asInBundle (even though the example has bundles) and there is no wasInfluencedBy in the example (it could be easily added as an inference of wasAttributedTo).
- Rename chart maker, make consistent.
- - I wonder if a better example organization instead of ex:chartgen would be "National Newspaper".
- - I think the team was already looking at the consistency of the examples. It was Chart Generators and now in this example it's Chart Generators Inc.
- it was suggested for prov-dm that examples should be described in past tense. It should be done here too.
Backburner
- Why can't we eat our own dogfood?
- How would you encode http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#acknowledgements in prov-o?