ISSUE-660: Constraints of PROV-Dictionary

TomDN

Constraints of PROV-Dictionary

State:

CLOSED

Product:

PROV-DICTIONARY

Raised by:

Tom De Nies

Opened on:

2013-04-11

Description:

Luc raised some interesting ideas for the constraints.

Note that we now have this inference:
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/dictionary/Overview.html#membership-insertion-membership-inference
Inference D4 (membership-insertion-membership) Here, KV1 is a set of key-entity pairs and K1 is the key-set of KV1.
1. IF prov:hadDictionaryMember(d1, e, k) and prov:derivedByInsertionFrom(d2, d1, KV1) and k ∉ K1 THEN prov:hadDictionaryMember(d2, e, k)
2. IF prov:hadDictionaryMember(d2, e, k) and prov:derivedByInsertionFrom(d2, d1, KV1) and k ∉ K1 THEN prov:hadDictionaryMember(d1, e, k)

(2nd part suggested by Luc)
I do have one immediate question: do we introduce an infinite loop by doing this? (consequent of 1. appears in antecedent of 2., and vice versa)
Or is this covered by http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-constraints/#overview ?

This got me thinking. If we have this, do we really need Inference D8? https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/dictionary/Overview.html#insertion-removal-membership-inference

Couldn't we just specify the same constraint as D4, but for removal?
Suggestion:
Inference D... (membership-removal-membership) Here, K1 is a set of keys.
1. IF prov:hadDictionaryMember(d1, e, k) and prov:derivedByRemovalFrom(d2, d1, K1) and k ∉ K1 THEN prov:hadDictionaryMember(d2, e, k)
2. IF prov:hadDictionaryMember(d2, e, k) and prov:derivedByRemovalFrom(d2, d1, K1) THEN prov:hadDictionaryMember(d1, e, k)
Note that in the second case, k ∉ K1 is always true, otherwise constraint D9 is violated.

Do we then have enough to guarantee that insertions and removals do not introduce any new key-entity pairs, other than those specified? (which is why we had Inference D8)
I think so, so I'd like to propose this solution. Could we have your support or objections via mail or on today's call?

Regards,
Tom

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. Re: PROV-ISSUE-660 (TomDN): Constraints of PROV-Dictionary [PROV-DICTIONARY] (from tom.denies@ugent.be on 2013-04-22)
2. Re: PROV-ISSUE-660 (TomDN): Constraints of PROV-Dictionary [PROV-DICTIONARY] (from tom.denies@ugent.be on 2013-04-15)
3. Re: PROV-ISSUE-660 (TomDN): Constraints of PROV-Dictionary [PROV-DICTIONARY] (from jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk on 2013-04-15)
4. Re: PROV-ISSUE-660 (TomDN): Constraints of PROV-Dictionary [PROV-DICTIONARY] (from tom.denies@ugent.be on 2013-04-15)
5. PROV-Dictionary update for telecon 4.11.2013 (from tom.denies@ugent.be on 2013-04-11)
6. Re: PROV-ISSUE-660 (TomDN): Constraints of PROV-Dictionary [PROV-DICTIONARY] (from tom.denies@ugent.be on 2013-04-11)
7. PROV-ISSUE-660 (TomDN): Constraints of PROV-Dictionary [PROV-DICTIONARY] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-04-11)

Related notes:

No additional notes.

Display change log