Difference between revisions of "PIL OWL Ontology Meeting 2012-08-06"

From Provenance WG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Attendees)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
* [http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2012-07-30 previous meeting]
 
* [http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2012-07-30 previous meeting]
 
* date: 2012-08-06
 
* date: 2012-08-06
* time: 12pm ET, 5pm GMT
+
* time: 12pm ET, 17:00 GMT (was: 16:30 GMT)
* via Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference 695 ("OWL") 
+
* via Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference 695 ("OWL")  
 
* wiki page: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2012-08-06
 
* wiki page: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2012-08-06
 
* titan page: http://titanpad.com/JGfCrD13tq
 
* titan page: http://titanpad.com/JGfCrD13tq
Line 13: Line 13:
  
 
* Stian
 
* Stian
* Jun
 
* Khalid  
 
* Satya 
 
 
* Daniel
 
* Daniel
 
* David
 
* David
 +
* Jun
 +
* Satya
  
 
regrets:
 
regrets:
Line 23: Line 22:
 
* Tim
 
* Tim
 
* Stephan
 
* Stephan
 +
* Khalid
 +
 +
 +
== Summary ==
 +
* We want to create an OWL formalization of appropriate constraints from section 5 of PROV-Constraint. Stian to send email.
 +
* Waiting for progress on David's diagrams
 +
* Jun awaiting feedback from Tim on terms to omit - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ahxrga9AQHb_dDBQV3ZyWEN6S2RXcWVZMzI0S0xKeEE
 +
* Stian want more volunteers for example checking - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtpchNBBcY-qdElUakV3M2paMUpIRE9IU2ZSMF9Xb3c#gid=0 - Daniel signs up - Deadline September
 +
* Stephan closed issues: 
 +
** http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/456
 +
** http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/457 
 +
* Khalid to do HTML styling of terms
 +
* Daniel awaiting Tim's feedback on 3.2 --> Stian will review
 +
* GK's issue on printed references --> Stian take
 +
* TODO: rename prov:Source to prov:PrimarySource and prov:qualifiedSource to prov:qualifiedPrimarySource in OWL and examples -> generate HTML
  
 
== Agenda ==
 
== Agenda ==
Line 33: Line 47:
 
=== Rescheduling the regular call ===
 
=== Rescheduling the regular call ===
  
* Jun cannot make 5pm beginning in Sept. (4pm or 4:30pm would be better)
+
Following calls start at 16:30 GMT (30 minutes earlier). This telcon might stop at 17:30 GMT.
* 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)
 
  
* Tim: the meetings will get shorter now that we are in LC.
+
=== Formalizing PROV-Constraints as OWL? ===
* The group agrees to shift the meeting times one half earlier to 11:30pm ET
+
Also see pgroth's https://github.com/pgroth/prov-constraints-validator-spin
* TODO: Satya to contact Sandro and Luc to shift Zakim.
+
* our group will shift to the new time when Zakim gets switched.
+
  
The instructions for requesting Zakim are here:
+
Jun: Does this work yet?
  
https://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/TeleconferenceHowTo.htm
+
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/releases/ED-prov-constraints-20120723/prov-constraints.html
 +
PGroth using Sparql: https://github.com/pgroth/prov-constraints-validator-spin/blob/master/prov-rules/inference/activity/generation-use-commuication-inference-6.txt
  
Basically you send email to adminreq@w3.org, providing whatever details they might need.
+
Jun: People would be more interesting in validating provenance, rather than adding further inference. If a full OWL ontology could express all these constraints that would be very valuable. Starting on section 5.
 +
Stian: Like wasgeneratedBy functional
 +
Jun: And cardinality
 +
Jun: even with OWL Time ontology it would not be easy to do time constraints
 +
Jun: but things like reflexibility, functionality, etc, should be easy
 +
Jun: then perhaps SPIN rules for the more complex cases
 +
 
 +
Satya: Could also implement as per rules, a seperate PROV validation application to run together with any OWL reasoner.  
 +
 
 +
Stian: Think we have room to provide such a validator, but don't have to
 +
 
 +
Jun: If it comes out of our group, it will have resonance with ppl, even if it's not part of a standard. Certainly interesting, Paul is also trying to do something on this. But where do we schedule it in?
 +
 
 +
Stian: Not just some simple weekend work!
 +
 
 +
Who are interested?
 +
* Stian
 +
* Jun
 +
* Paul?
 +
* Tim (?)
 +
* Khalid, Paolo? (IPAW work on Datalog) (https://github.com/PaoloMissier/ProvToolbox/tree/master/datalog)
 +
 
 +
Jun: Paolo mentioning this on the implementation page already?
 +
 
 +
TODO: Stian to send email about this to get interest and find schedule.
  
  
Blog post: http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2012/07/24/the-prov-o-provenance-ontology-last-call/
 
  
 
=== ISSUES ===
 
=== ISSUES ===
  
==== Satya  ====
+
==== Satya  ====
  
 
==== David ====
 
==== David ====
Line 72: Line 102:
 
** TODO: David to review the comments on the daigram/ ordering in qualificatoin section narrative and provide recommendation to group.
 
** TODO: David to review the comments on the daigram/ ordering in qualificatoin section narrative and provide recommendation to group.
 
** Daniel: expanded-terms-example-all is useful, although it may be too big for the html. I would suggest to remove the boxes with additional metadata of the agents, entities and activities (the ones that are connected with dots). It will make things more simple, IMO.
 
** Daniel: expanded-terms-example-all is useful, although it may be too big for the html. I would suggest to remove the boxes with additional metadata of the agents, entities and activities (the ones that are connected with dots). It will make things more simple, IMO.
 +
 +
Daniel: Has provided feedback, but this discussion has not continued.
 +
Stian: Is it worth pursuing to get new diagrams for release?
 +
Daniel: Just some typos, David had also created some new diagrams that we might not all need.
  
 
==== Jun ====
 
==== Jun ====
Line 80: Line 114:
 
** Jun's stab: "prov:mentionOf is a special type of prov:specializationOf, which links a more specific Entity to a more general one that is described in a prov:Bundle. prov:asInBundle is used to cite the Bundle in which the more general Entity was mentioned."
 
** Jun's stab: "prov:mentionOf is a special type of prov:specializationOf, which links a more specific Entity to a more general one that is described in a prov:Bundle. prov:asInBundle is used to cite the Bundle in which the more general Entity was mentioned."
 
** TODO: Tim to incorporate feedback.
 
** TODO: Tim to incorporate feedback.
 +
*** Jun: Still awaiting feedback from Tim
  
 
==== Stian ====
 
==== Stian ====
  
 +
* Stian to send email about PROV-Constraints in OWL to get interest and find schedule.
 
* http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/349 [good] turtle examples in cross ref
 
* http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/349 [good] turtle examples in cross ref
 
** do the examples "fit the ontology"? TODO (CODE)
 
** do the examples "fit the ontology"? TODO (CODE)
Line 92: Line 128:
 
*** ... spelling mistakes
 
*** ... spelling mistakes
 
*** TODO: do the renaming to avoid the collisions. TODO: Stian to coordinate the renaming, assign them, coordinate.
 
*** 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.    
+
*** TODO: do as a whole, then backtrack to the examples.  
 
** work request: http://www.w3.org/mid/CAPRnXt=+Ownsy-Sw6Z3pUrmbHCz=wXaOCECuiN0txWtn0xPrJA@mail.gmail.com
 
** work request: http://www.w3.org/mid/CAPRnXt=+Ownsy-Sw6Z3pUrmbHCz=wXaOCECuiN0txWtn0xPrJA@mail.gmail.com
 
* coordination spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtpchNBBcY-qdElUakV3M2paMUpIRE9IU2ZSMF9Xb3c#gid=0
 
* coordination spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtpchNBBcY-qdElUakV3M2paMUpIRE9IU2ZSMF9Xb3c#gid=0
  
 
==== Stephan ====
 
==== Stephan ====
 
* http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/456 superclass in domain union (Association or 5 classes) -> (Association or InstantaneousEvent)
 
** Tim: done make the change, since no team objections.
 
** Stephan: add a justifications for any changes after LC
 
** TODO: Stephan review and close issue.
 
*** NOT DONE, will look at today [ --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.
 
** done Tim to rerun the editors draft
 
** TODO stephan to review
 
** REVIEWED, Current Editor's Draft HTML looks good
 
  
 
==== Khalid ====
 
==== Khalid ====
Line 123: Line 143:
 
** http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/working-dir/prov-o-unhighlighted-cross-reference.html#Activity
 
** http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/working-dir/prov-o-unhighlighted-cross-reference.html#Activity
  
<pre>
+
* TODO: Khalid add a class to the strong, and add a color to the class.
<    a <strong>prov:Activity</strong>, :Graduation;
+
** dark red #824 or burgundy #9E0508
---
+
>    a prov:Activity, :Graduation;
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
<    a <strong>prov:Agent</strong>, prov:Person;
+
---
+
>    a prov:Agent, prov:Person;
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
<    a <strong>prov:Agent</strong>, prov:Organization;
+
---
+
>    a prov:Agent, prov:Organization;
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
<    a <strong>prov:Entity</strong>;
+
---
+
>    a prov:Entity;
+
</pre>
+
 
+
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:
+
 
+
<pre>
+
<code>var faq = <strong style="color:blue;">new</strong> Array(3)</code>
+
</pre>
+
 
+
TODO: Khalid add a class to the strong, and add a color to the class.
+
Stian: One example with dark red: http://i.imgur.com/XpsYF.png (color: #824)
+
  pre strong {
+
    color: #824;
+
  }
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
* Stian: with dark red: http://i.imgur.com/XpsYF.png (color: #824)
+
* 12:35 khalid: That looks nice, better than black anyway
+
* 12:36 Stian: #248  (dark blue) also nice
+
* 12:38 Jun: Looks nice
+
* 12:38 Jun: dark red
+
* 12:38 zednik: burgundy #9E0508 also looks nice
+
 
+
  
  
Line 183: Line 160:
 
Daniel: rewrote some parts, filled in some missing terms. Responded to Tim. TODO: Tim to review the changes.
 
Daniel: rewrote some parts, filled in some missing terms. Responded to Tim. TODO: Tim to review the changes.
  
Daniel: what about the other figures? 
+
Daniel: Still waiting for Tim to review.
 +
 
 +
Daniel: what about the other figures?  
 
Tim: How many figures?
 
Tim: How many figures?
 
Tim: let's postpone until David joins us.
 
Tim: let's postpone until David joins us.
 +
Stian: takes over Tim's review
 +
  
 
==== Tim ====
 
==== Tim ====
Line 193: Line 174:
 
* http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/461 (Graham's printed cross reference)
 
* http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/461 (Graham's printed cross reference)
 
** Last push on this was email "Re: Your feedback on pre-LC prov-o" from 18-20 July.
 
** Last push on this was email "Re: Your feedback on pre-LC prov-o" from 18-20 July.
 +
** STian takes this
 +
  
 
===== Mine =====
 
===== Mine =====
Line 207: Line 190:
 
** WG resolved to rename prov:Source to prov:PrimarySource and prov:qualifiedSource to prov:qualifiedPrimarySource.
 
** WG resolved to rename prov:Source to prov:PrimarySource and prov:qualifiedSource to prov:qualifiedPrimarySource.
 
** but can we change in LC? Sandro.
 
** but can we change in LC? Sandro.
 
+
** Stian: Any takers? Should be a search/replace in OWL+examples and new aquarius run-through
 +
*** Leave for next week
 
* http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvNamespaceManagement#Solution_2.2_Use_owl:import_and_return_full_merge_of_PROV-O_and_all_Notes
 
* http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvNamespaceManagement#Solution_2.2_Use_owl:import_and_return_full_merge_of_PROV-O_and_all_Notes
  

Revision as of 16:37, 6 August 2012

Meeting Information

prov-wg - Modeling Task Force - OWL group telecon

Attendees

  • Stian
  • Daniel
  • David
  • Jun
  • Satya

regrets:

  • Tim
  • Stephan
  • Khalid


Summary

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

Following calls start at 16:30 GMT (30 minutes earlier). This telcon might stop at 17:30 GMT.


Formalizing PROV-Constraints as OWL?

Also see pgroth's https://github.com/pgroth/prov-constraints-validator-spin

Jun: Does this work yet?

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/releases/ED-prov-constraints-20120723/prov-constraints.html PGroth using Sparql: https://github.com/pgroth/prov-constraints-validator-spin/blob/master/prov-rules/inference/activity/generation-use-commuication-inference-6.txt

Jun: People would be more interesting in validating provenance, rather than adding further inference. If a full OWL ontology could express all these constraints that would be very valuable. Starting on section 5. Stian: Like wasgeneratedBy functional Jun: And cardinality Jun: even with OWL Time ontology it would not be easy to do time constraints Jun: but things like reflexibility, functionality, etc, should be easy Jun: then perhaps SPIN rules for the more complex cases

Satya: Could also implement as per rules, a seperate PROV validation application to run together with any OWL reasoner.

Stian: Think we have room to provide such a validator, but don't have to

Jun: If it comes out of our group, it will have resonance with ppl, even if it's not part of a standard. Certainly interesting, Paul is also trying to do something on this. But where do we schedule it in?

Stian: Not just some simple weekend work!

Who are interested?

Jun: Paolo mentioning this on the implementation page already?

TODO: Stian to send email about this to get interest and find schedule.


ISSUES

Satya

David

Daniel: Has provided feedback, but this discussion has not continued. Stian: Is it worth pursuing to get new diagrams for release? Daniel: Just some typos, David had also created some new diagrams that we might not all need.

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
    • TODO mentionOf in narrative is not clear - use the one from the ontology "The mention of an Entity in a Bundle (containing a description of this Entity) is another Entity that is a specialization of the former and that presents the Bundle as a further additional aspect."
    • Jun's stab: "prov:mentionOf is a special type of prov:specializationOf, which links a more specific Entity to a more general one that is described in a prov:Bundle. prov:asInBundle is used to cite the Bundle in which the more general Entity was mentioned."
    • TODO: Tim to incorporate feedback.
      • Jun: Still awaiting feedback from Tim

Stian

Stephan

Khalid

  • TODO: Khalid add a class to the strong, and add a color to the class.
    • dark red #824 or burgundy #9E0508


Daniel

  • TODO 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.

Daniel: rewrote some parts, filled in some missing terms. Responded to Tim. TODO: Tim to review the changes.

Daniel: Still waiting for Tim to review.

Daniel: what about the other figures? Tim: How many figures? Tim: let's postpone until David joins us. Stian: takes over Tim's review


Tim

Someone please take


Mine
  • Ivan's comments http://www.w3.org/mid/2BB8960E-3025-4116-B43B-4185BB99A68F@w3.org
    • his means that there is an editorial issue in the current Last Call which still refers to the TR space (in the abstract)
  • Update figures to latest draft: Well sppotted, I hadn't realized. I have changed it. They are 2 different activities. (see Daniel)
    • Regarding the image with the bundlePost in the html, I have spotted a typo: There is an edge with prov:hadLocation from the pyublicationActivity to the Location, which is incorrect. This edge should be from :post9821v1 instead (as you have it with :post9821v2). Also, there is a "my" prefix in the edge snapshotContent that should be ":" according to the example. Also, as I suggested before i would remove the boxes with "type" and "date" to simplify the although that's just my opinion.
    • Finally, I had to do some small changes to the example, adding annotations to the bundle. Would you mind adding those, please?. (Daniel)
  • Review Daniel's 3.2
  • Luc's scan


AOB