Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
PIL OWL Ontology Meeting 2012-05-28
From Provenance WG Wiki
Contents
Meeting Information
prov-wg - Modeling Task Force - OWL group telecon
- previous meeting
- date: 2012-05-28
- time: 12pm ET, 5pm GMT
- via Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference 695 ("OWL")
- wiki page: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2012-05-28
- titan page: http://titanpad.com/yHUXNuOXUn
- next meeting
Attendees
- Tim
- Daniel
- Khalid
Regrets:
- Stian
- Paul
- Satya
- Stephan
- 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
ISSUES
Daniel
- done: ActivityInvolvement subclassOf [ on prov:hadActivity max 0 ] .
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/381 Jun's feedback.
Stian
- https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/372 qualified prop chains
- (prov:qualifiedUsage prov:entity) rdfs:subPropertyOf prov:used .
- Why the new "RL++ errors"?
- Jun/Stian/Satya will take a look and report back what that error message means so that we can include them in the HMTL page (send emails to 372 chain)
- Satya: playing with protege OWL API. Trying to recreate the error.
- ... Stian sent a summary.
- ... shouldn't be a problem
- Stian: thinks a bug in the OWL API.
- Jun: tried to reproduce the error, but it never worked (never got anything back).
- https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/374 prov:membership [ a prov:Membership ]
- TIm: why do we have the indirection?
- TODO: Stian to think it through and reply on the list.
- Khalid: b/c it was incomplete.
- Stian: "complete membership" we have CompleteMembership.
- TIm: wasn't Membeship Involvement?
Satya
- For Involvement example - use non PROV properties (not use specific sub-type of involvement)
- https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/315)
- Inferences captured by formal semantics by James?
- wasQuotedFrom still not subproperty of wasAttributedTo
Tim
- Additional cross references in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/Overview.html
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/Overview.html#Usage
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/Overview.html#hadActivity
- Stian: Looks really nice with the new additions
- Paul suggests "class can be used with relationship" http://www.w3.org/mid/CAJCyKRqsy4oTor8D8xkpSDUMaOPAsXER+Cxsh1crU-vHCK3EmQ@mail.gmail.com
- Stian: Yes, less confusing than "parent in domain of"
- Tim: "in domain of" atTime (from EntityInvolvement)
- Stian: Good tradeoff between clarity and truthfulness :)
- Tim: "Properties that can be used with this class"
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/336 latest round of feedback
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/276 coverage
- automation still down.
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/348 property naming
- ongoing, describing and documenting is the focus now.
- breaking out collections to prov-oc
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-oc - just collections
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o-woc - without collections
- Daniel: It's hard for one to notice that collections is missing, since the rest is so long!
- CLOSED https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/375 OWL spec property types URLs
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/377 RL++ justifications appendix
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/379 update 3.1 diagram
- Jun: In the updated diagram "Figure ???", it doesn't show prov:wasInvalidatedBy, prov:generatedAt, and prov:invalidatedAt. They are listed in section 2. This needs to be made consistent. We also miss examples for this.
- Tim: {generated,invalidated}At are not in PROV-O - += atTime?
- Tim: I think adding these goes beyond starting points.
- Khalid, Daniel agree to keep them as extended terms.
- The text in section 3.1 still mentions prov:wasStartedByActivity.
- We don't have any explanation about invalidation properties, nor examples.
- Jun: In the updated diagram "Figure ???", it doesn't show prov:wasInvalidatedBy, prov:generatedAt, and prov:invalidatedAt. They are listed in section 2. This needs to be made consistent. We also miss examples for this.
- CLOSED http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/380 Start hadActivity missing
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/382 Jun's feedback part deux.
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/83 annotate prov:inverse local names
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Inverse_properties_discussion#Inverse_properties_discussion
- TODO: Tim to review the list.
- TODO: Tim to draft narrative for the appendix
Stephan
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/267 annotate subproperties
- Committed http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/diff/3d85f26e2250/ontology/ProvenanceOntology.owl
- sometimes used comments, sometimes used @ annotate axiom.
Khalid
- For http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/349 : http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#qualifiedInvalidation
- Khalid: did this.
- ... if I have a prov:invalidation, either the property or class can be used so both are seen.
- ... some examples are too long.
- ... suggest to highlight the terms that are being illustrated.
- TODO: Khalid to mock up what a highlight would look like.
Jun
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/349 turtle examples in cross ref
- TODO: Jun to remove old comments and re-ping on those that still exist.
- Jun: difficult to understand how to use every term in the ontology. b/c don't knwo what concept/properties can be used together.F
- ... concerned, might need work on qualification and expanded terms narratives.
- ... people have been saying there there is "systematic patterns" for qualifcations.
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/Overview.html#description-expanded-terms
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/Overview.html#description-qualified-terms
- TODO: what is the purpose of the pattern. used "qualifiedX" to class X (e.g.)
- TODO: Jun to revisit where the pattern is. http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o
AOB
How would you encode http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#acknowledgements in prov-o?