PIL OWL Ontology Meeting 2012-07-23

From Provenance WG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Meeting Information

prov-wg - Modeling Task Force - OWL group telecon

Attendees

  • Tim 
  • Khalid  
  • Daniel 
  • Stephan

Regrets:

  • Stian
  • David
  • Satya 
  • Jun

Agenda

For the issues that you are assigned:

  • describe the original concern
  • describe any perspectives already expressed
  • recommend next step, or propose a solution

Rescheduling the regular call

  • Jun cannot make 5pm beginning in Sept. (4pm or 4:30pm would be better)
  • Daniel is in California for the next few months.

So I think our timezone span is back to:

  • -8 (Daniel)
  • -7 (Stephan)
  • -5 (Tim/Satya)
  • 0 (Stian, Khalid, Jun, David)

ISSUES

Satya (Khalid standing in)

  • we need blog post by 24 July
    • just a quick update - what's changed from the
    • last version. What's important in the ontology (e.g. the sectioning).
    • I guess a bit about using it in applications.
    • It doesn't have to be long maybe 2 paragraphs.
    • https://docs.google.com/document/d/170_NF7mOHg4PlJ_tK8gytRJA2K2AcCOOEo_Z5GycvpE/edit
    • Khalid: we have something that is okay and can be released.
    • ... the w3c process.
    • Tim: TODO David, Daniel, Stephan to read and give comments to Khalid
    • ... Khalid will hand off to Paul.

David

Jun

(TL: I think everything in Jun's section that does NOT have a TODO should be dropped, since they are settled.)

  • I also processed outstanding lines from others listed below
    • TODO Stephan close comment by "Done" in col D:
      • Line 24, about Plan
      • Line 28, about Role
    • Satya 
      • Line 30, about source
      • seems to be settled.
  • 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!)
    • 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)
      • Jun: I think this has been covered by the currently expanded explanations right at the beginning of the section, by giving an example of how association can be qualified.
      • 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.

Stian

Stephan

  • http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/457 domain mismatch
    • change has been made in ProvenanceOntology.owl and staged LC files.  This issue can be closed
    • prov:wasInfluencedBy rdfs:domain prov:Entity .
    • prov:wasAssociatedWith rdfs:domain prov:Agent ; rdfs:subPropertyOf prov:wasInfluencedBy .
    • The above was an error.
    • TODO: Tim to rerun the editors draft and TODO stephan to review

Khalid

  • highlighting focus terms in prov-o examples
    • with strong HTML elements
    • Khalid: we should see if the group wants / does not want it.
    • http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#AgentInfluence
    • TODO: Khalid to redo markup example from LC draft.
    • we can use <code instead of <pre, which will allow us to markup the code content
      • for example, the following code markup uses strong and style coloring
<code>var faq = <strong style="color:blue;">new</strong> Array(3)</code>

Daniel

  • Work through review of prov-o july 3 2012 for last call (33 RAISED feedback points left of 100+)
  • 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.

Tim

Someone please take
Mine
  • Luc's scan

AOB