Re: PROV-ISSUE-72 (DGarijo): Uses should be renamed as used [Formal Model]

With regard to tenses, I note that the current relations are not uniformly
in the same tense anyway.

The problem is that "derived" and "generated" are different kinds of word -
"derived" can be a contemporary property making reference to the past, while
"generated" is always a past tense action.

"X is derived from Y" can be read as saying, "it is a property of X that it
is, at this moment, derived from Y", e.g. "my name is derived from ancient
Norse", and this has the meaning intended by our model.

"X is generated by Y" only has one meaning in English which is "whenever
instances of class X occur they were, are and will be generated by instances
of class Y", e.g. "smoke is generated by fire". This is not the meaning
intended by our model and is not about provenance. Similarly for
"controlled".

It may be a small thing and we could say that the model should be read
without pedantic observance of English grammar, but it is just something
else which makes the model harder to understand and apply correctly. I
personally see least ambiguity in uniformly past tense: "wasGeneratedBy",
"used", "wasDerivedFrom"... For users who don't yet have a firm grasp of
what "provenance" is, past tense can greatly help convey the intuition.

Thanks,
Simon

On 23 August 2011 21:12, Deborah L. McGuinness <dlm@cs.rpi.edu> wrote:

>  On 8/23/2011 3:35 PM, Satya Sahoo wrote:
>
> Hi Ralph,
> My comments are inline:
>
>  >* would recommend dropping the 'has' from 'hasParticipant' (silent 'has'
> rule on noun predicates)*
>
> i strongly support naming conventions that help people know at a glance if
> a term is a property/role or a class/concept.
> Thus I rarely support a "silent has" rule.
>
> I have found over many years of teaching and consulting that it is too easy
> for people to misuse classes as properties as vice versa but when naming
> makes it clear which is which, they make way less errors and reuse is
> increased.
>
>  *, or, optionally, finding an appropriate gerund phrase with a noun
> suffix, perhaps 'Party' in this case. The predicate would then be
> 'participatingParty'.*
>
>  For the participation property, a verb is required since - (a) gerund
> phrase is continuous (participating) while other properties you suggested
> are perfective (generated, controlled), and (b) in a triple construct, it
> will read as "(some) process execution" -> participatingParty -> "(some)
> entity", which does not convey the intended meaning of the property.
>
>  I think we should keep hadParticipant, but use other property names you
> have suggested.
>
>  > *Specification of tense can be done either with reification or, in the
> case of, RDF-based models, use of rdf:Statement.*
> I did not understand this, can you please give an example?
>
>  > *Also advocate that all predicates begin with a lowercase letter.*
>  We already do that as mentioned in the formal model document.
>
> i agree with the lower case .
> some conventions use lower case for properties and upper case for classes.
>
>
>  Thanks.
>
>  Best,
> Satya
>
>  On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Ralph Hodgson <rhodgson@topquadrant.com>wrote:
>
>>  *Hi Luc,*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *I would recommend dropping the 'has' from 'hasParticipant' (silent 'has'
>> rule on noun predicates), or, optionally, finding an appropriate gerund
>> phrase with a noun suffix, perhaps 'Party' in this case. The predicate would
>> then be 'participatingParty'. So in answer to your question, the predicate
>> names become tense-less verb or gerund phrases.  Specification of tense can
>> be done either with reification or, in the case of, RDF-based models, use of
>> rdf:Statement.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *Below is a diagram generated by TopBraidComposer of, what I believe to
>> be a current Provenance Ontology model )from
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/738e9b4d8520/ontology/ProvenanceOntology.owl
>> ):*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> ****
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *The Turtle file is attached (I need to consult others on where to put
>> such files on the WG site). I transformed the OWL original using SPIN rules
>> so I can repeat this process in the future.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> Ralph Hodgson, @ralphtq <http://twitter.com/ralphtq>
>>
>> Mobile Phone: +1 781-789-1664 <%2B1%20781-789-1664>
>>
>> CTO, TopQuadrant <http://www.topquadrant.com/>, @TopQuadrant<http://twitter.com/topquadrant>
>>
>> *Blog:** Voyages of the Semantic Enterprise<http://topquadrantblog.blogspot.com/>
>> *
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *From:* Luc Moreau [mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk]
>> *Sent:* Monday, August 22, 2011 1:57 PM
>> *To:* rhodgson@topquadrant.com
>> *Cc:* public-prov-wg@w3.org
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: PROV-ISSUE-72 (DGarijo): Uses should be renamed as used
>> [Formal Model]
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Ralph,
>> Don't you end up with a mix of relation names:
>>  uses, derivedFrom and hasParticipant ?
>>
>> My preference is for uniformity. If we go for a verbal form for some, we
>> should go for all;
>> otherwise for none.
>>
>> Luc
>>
>> On 22/08/11 20:09, Ralph Hodgson wrote:
>>
>> *Propose that 'is' be dropped from all predicates that have a suffix. Two
>> reasons - parsimony and connotations (in fact denotations) about tense are
>> removed.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *            Example: 'isDerivedFrom' becomes  'derivedFrom'.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *Also advocate that all predicates begin with a lowercase letter.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> Ralph Hodgson, @ralphtq <http://twitter.com/ralphtq>
>>
>> Mobile Phone: +1 781-789-1664 <%2B1%20781-789-1664>
>>
>> CTO, TopQuadrant <http://www.topquadrant.com/>, @TopQuadrant<http://twitter.com/topquadrant>
>>
>> *Blog:** Voyages of the Semantic Enterprise<http://topquadrantblog.blogspot.com/>
>> *
>>
>> *Next Intro Class: **Introduction to Semantic Web Technologies: What they
>> are and how to use them -  Sept. 12 - 15, 2011, Washington DC area<http://www.topquadrant.com/training/intro.html>
>> * ,
>>
>> *Next Advanced Class: **Advanced Product Training, Sept. 26 - 29 , 2011,
>> Washington, DC area <http://www.topquadrant.com/training/advanced.html>*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *From:* public-prov-wg-request@w3.org [
>> mailto:public-prov-wg-request@w3.org <public-prov-wg-request@w3.org>] *On
>> Behalf Of *Luc Moreau
>> *Sent:* Monday, August 22, 2011 2:53 AM
>> *To:* public-prov-wg@w3.org
>> *Subject:* Re: PROV-ISSUE-72 (DGarijo): Uses should be renamed as used
>> [Formal Model]
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Daniel and Simon,
>>
>> In the conceptual model (up to section 5), all relations use present tense
>> ,
>> uses, isDerivedFrom, isComplementOf, isGeneratedBy, ...
>>
>> I agree with Daniel, we need consistency in the conceptual model and
>> formal model.
>>
>> I agree with Simon, it's nice to point back into the past.
>>
>> Luc
>>
>> PS. I took as an action to poll about the use of tense.
>>
>> On 08/11/2011 04:46 PM, Simon Miles wrote:
>>
>> +1 for "used", for the reasons you give.
>>
>>
>>
>> -1 for "isUsedBy". All other relations in the model link effect/later
>>
>> occurrence to cause/earlier occurrence, so "isUsedBy" would be
>>
>> inconsistent. This means that provenance graphs would not consistently
>>
>> point back into the past of the thing we're seeing the provenance of,
>>
>> and would be confusing to iteratively navigate.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11 August 2011 16:38, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker
>>
>> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> PROV-ISSUE-72 (DGarijo): Uses should be renamed as used [Formal Model]
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/72
>>
>>
>>
>> Raised by: Daniel Garijo
>>
>> On product: Formal Model
>>
>>
>>
>> Since all the other properties are using the past tense, we should be consistens and rename uses to "used" or "isUsedBy" flipping the domain and range
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>
>> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
>>
>> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>
>> Professor Luc Moreau
>>
>> Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
>>
>> University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
>>
>> Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
>>
>> United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Dr Simon Miles
Lecturer, Department of Informatics
Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
+44 (0)20 7848 1166