See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 26 September 2011
<tlebo> wiki for this meeting: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2011-09-26
http://titanpad.com/wN4lUHpAcv
<Luc> what is provenanceContainer in entity? I don't understand the notation used.
file: ///home/stain/stuff/src/provenance-wg/prov/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html#provenancecontainer I guess
that is a subclass
<tlebo> TODO: break all visual abbreviations - show rdfs:subClassOf directly.
Luc does not like that a ProvenanceContainer is a subclass of Entity
<tlebo> TODO: ensure that the ProvenanceContainer is no longer an Entity. (Tim)
<Luc> it's not that Luc doesn't like. It does not match the data model.
In PROV-DM, an entity expression is a representation of an identifiable characterized thing.
so is the provcontainer not one of those?
<Luc> no
<tlebo> luc: top level classes: ProvenanceContainer, Account, Entity, ProcessExecution
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#ProvenanceContainer
<Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#ProvenanceContainer
<satya> This is PROV-ISSUE-66
<tlebo> paolo: we are not "directly" asserting provenance of ProvenanceContainer
<khalidbelhajjame> I think we should just stick to the data model as much as possible
<dgarijo> @khalid: yes, of course. But if the model is designed for asserting provenance, then it should provide the mechanisms to assert provenance about provenance records too!
<khalidbelhajjame> +q
<Luc> satya, there is a type error!
<tlebo> (the objective of the diagram was to illustrate how a third party could extend PROV - does anyone have feedback on how well/poorly this is conveyed?)
<dgarijo> could you provide the link to the diagram, please? I joined late :(
tlebo: I think it's good, but I wonder if we could show extension by subproperties or subclass
just adding new attributes to an prov:Entity is merely how entity is to be used anyway..?
<tlebo> @stian: news:Entity subclass prov:Entity , THEN assert the domains on news:Entity ?
<Luc> you can take multiple perspective on a provenance container: it's a curated set of assertions, it's a set of triples in a triple store, it's a 'platonic' set of triples, it's something in a database.
so Journalist subclass of Agent, or Publishing subclass of ProcessExecution might be interesting. But then you are very close to the danger of touching on roles..
<Luc> Each of them can be modelled by an entity expression.
<Luc> An apple is represented by an entity expression, which involves selecting some attributes
<khalidbelhajjame> -q
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#expression-Account says
Note: Currently, the non-terminal asserter is defined as URI. We may want the asserter to be an agent instead, and therefore use PROV-DM to express the provenance of PROV-DM assertions. The editors seek inputs on how to resolve this issue.
is this what we've briefly touched on?
<Luc> yes stain
<dgarijo> I have to agree with Satya
<dgarijo> I don't see the difference either.
<dgarijo> if a prov container can be set of statements, and we are able to refer to them and assert triples using them as source, then it has a identifier.
<Paolo_> the corollary of what Luc is saying, i.e., viewing a provenance container as a "thing in the world", is that you don't need to make ProvenanceContainer a subclass of Entity in order to do "meta-provenance"
so Luc's point is that there (could be) other attributes you need to specify, like the location the provenance container is stored in, or description of its content, etc - many entities
<dgarijo> +q
<khalidbelhajjame> En entity is a characterization of a thing, provenance container is not necessarily a characterization of a thing.
mm.. so there's nothing saying a ProvContainer *is not* an entity, but it would probably not be a good entity on its own because there are many ways to describe such meta-provenance
<khalidbelhajjame> A provContainer can be a characterization, but not necessarily one.
<dgarijo> -q
<dgarijo> ok, now it is clear for me. So basically Prov container and Entity are not disjoint, but not necessarily the former subclass of the latter.
and t might be misleading to say it is always an entity, because it hints that you *should* do meta-provenance in only a single way
<dgarijo> :)
<tlebo> provenanceContainer: is a list of accounts, namespace definitions, and a collection of provenance assertions.
so provenanceContainer() in the model is rdf:RDF (or equivalent headers) in RDF
<tlebo> JSON needs ProvenanceContainer, while RDF/OWL does not need it "because it comes for free".
<dgarijo> @tim: but it depends on the way you implement it: if you select named graphs, then your provenance container could be the named graphs.
mm.. and then you can do RDF->model->JSON->model->RDF and somewhat at least don't mess up namespaces and stuff
<tlebo> TODO: class diagram (Khalid)
<Luc> how is this group proposing to model accounts?
<khalidbelhajjame> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html
<dgarijo> @Luc: should they be a subclass of provenance container?
@Luc I think we are still thinking of that as named graph / separate OWL/RDF resources per account - due to how identifiers depends on the account in the abstract model
<dgarijo> since they are a collection of provenance assertions too.
<Luc> yes, probably name graph would be the way ... but then this does not show in OWL?
<tlebo> stian: show the other subclasses of the extension.
<tlebo> (TODO: Tim show this)
<khalidbelhajjame> @Luc, yes I agree, we should be as explicit as possible
<dgarijo> and what about having account as subclass of prov container? I think it could be fine.
<Luc> @daniel, an account would then inherit prov container's properties ... but accounts have no namespace, and no index of accounts
<Paolo_> @Daniel yes that would be reasonable -- something we discussed in the model
<tlebo> the news crime file example: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/2b514f651c03/ontology/examples/ontology-extensions/crime-file/instances/example-1/crime.ttl.vertical.png
I would suggest to do role example with a process execution with 2 or more uses or 2 or more generations
so that you see why you would want a role
or 2 or more agents
I have some in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/examples/ontology-extensions/workflow/prov2.ttl
<Luc> i will have to go, sorry!
<dgarijo> bye!
<satya> ok bye Daniel
<satya> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html#entity
those notes don't match the exxmple
<dgarijo> no, I wasn't leaving, just saying bye to Luc :)
<satya> oh ok :)
<satya> bye Luc
<tlebo> +1
<tlebo> satya: we let the conceptual model become the logical model.
<jcheney> Got to go.
<dgarijo> see you, jcheney.
<Paolo_> guys I really have to go
<dgarijo> see you, paolo!
<Paolo_> bye
<tlebo> trackbot, end telcon
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: stain Inferring Scribes: stain WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. Default Present: Satya_Sahoo, +1.315.330.aaaa, stain, +44.238.059.aabb Present: Satya_Sahoo +1.315.330.aaaa stain +44.238.059.aabb Found Date: 26 Sep 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/09/26-prov-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]
