Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
PIL OWL Ontology Meeting 2012-07-09
From Provenance WG Wiki
Contents
Meeting Information
prov-wg - Modeling Task Force - OWL group telecon
- previous meeting
- date: 2012-07-09
- 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_2012-07-16
- titan page: http://titanpad.com/gO2dlbPqV6
- next meeting
Attendees
- Tim
- Satya
- David Corsar
- Stian
- Stephan
- Sam Coppens (regrets)
- Jun (regrets)
- Khalid (regrets)
- Daniel (regrets)
Agenda
For the issues that you are assigned:
- describe the original concern
- describe any perspectives already expressed
- recommend next step, or propose a solution
Voting on Thursday to release PROV-O to public
ISSUES
All
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/83 prov:inverse local names
- narrative and design rationale http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#names-of-inverse-properties
- will have table http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/inverse-names.html <--- ALL: Are these inverse names okay?
- and cite http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/inverses.ttl
- Stian: "derivation's usage. same style on usage and generation on a Derivation's inverse."
- Stian/Daniel/Tim discussions on wiki
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
- focus is on sections 3.1 - 3.3
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/382 qualification section feedback
- 4th column of qualification tables is hard to understand (we're up to 6 now!)
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#description-qualified-terms
- Stephan: mouse over on the header (within style guidlines)
- TODO: Stephan:
- 4th column of qualification tables is hard to understand (we're up to 6 now!)
- extra paragraph for "now that we've qualified, what can we do?" (right at the beginning of the section, after or before the cheat-sheet tables)
- activity, entity, agent, dictionary point to the objects being qualified
- hadActivity, hadGeneration, hadUsage hadPlan and hadRole provide the additional statements about the can-be-qualifeid properties, via their corresponding qualify classes or an involvement class
- TODO: Tim to make sure all are covered.
- extra paragraph for "now that we've qualified, what can we do?" (right at the beginning of the section, after or before the cheat-sheet tables)
- rename prov:activity, prov:entity, prov:agent -> influencerAgent, influencingEntity, influencingActivity ?
- Tim: anybody have suggestions on rename?
- Stephan / Satya: too late to rename.
- Tim: postpone to list.
- rename prov:activity, prov:entity, prov:agent -> influencerAgent, influencingEntity, influencingActivity ?
- cheat-sheet tables for "what annotation can be put on {Delegation,Derivation,etc} - can you mock this up?
Stian
- no go on Altruism?
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/349 [good] turtle examples in cross ref
- do the examples "fit the ontology"? TODO (CODE)
- David, Stian, Stephan, Tim will work on this as we go (no clear leader)
- Stian's report
- Just use something that makes sense for that example. Like http://example.org/car http://example.org/customer http://example.org/alice http://example.org/workingAtHome
- Stian: a bit long, log book on what he did. Lots of considerations came up.
- ... example called the same (e1, e1, e1).
- ... spelling mistakes
- work request: http://www.w3.org/mid/CAPRnXt=+Ownsy-Sw6Z3pUrmbHCz=wXaOCECuiN0txWtn0xPrJA@mail.gmail.com
Satya
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/377 RL++ justifications appendix
- currently at http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#prov-o-owl-profile
- ... Stian: some domains are "doubled" one for RL and one for non-RL.
- ... Khalid: why are we defining the superclasses in addition to the union.
- ... Tim: hadActivity has two domains: Influence and (Delegation or Derivation or Start) --- Note that the latter is a subclass of the former---
- Luc's LC feedback: "hadRole: why is domain defined as intersection of Influence and six of its subclasses. Why not the subclasses directly?"
- TODO: include these considerations?
- Satya: hadActivity's domain: Delegation OR Derivation OR Start AND Influence
- Tim: The RIGHT is for the RL reasoner, the LEFT is handled okay by the DL reasoner.
- Satya: it will be different
- Stian: that's the point, but to be the same, we'd need intermediate classes. RL reasoners skip the union.
- Satya: given that Influence has so many subclasses. Suggest removing the AND Influence.
- Stian: adding information that is not really true,
- Satya: if you say JUST Influence, they you get in trouble.
- Stian: just by stating domain owl:Thing, that doesn't mean that it can be any arbitrary class that you want.
- TODO: Stian to first cut and send to Satya.
Tim
- Stephan review's
- Plan: We do not mention in Section 3.3 that Plan is a subclass of Entity (and we do mention that Bundle and Collection are subclasses of Entity).
- Stephan: we give all but plan, but do not mention it in 3.2. One could infer that Plan is not an entity.
- ... we don't say why Plan is an Entity. One could describe the provenance of a Plan. So it's not always a qulfieid term.
- TODO: Tim add the one-liner for Plan in 3.2, add to Figure 2. "one can describe provenancne of a plan".
- We may want to introduce Plan as a specialization of Entity in Section 3.2 and include it in Figure 2.
- Role: I think including role information in the Qualified Association example in section 3.3 would help the narrative. Otherwise, fine.
- Stephan: dind't see Role in section 3.3. Along with HadPlan, add a Role.
- TODO: Tim to add hadRole to the example, plus the narrative of the example.
- Plan: We do not mention in Section 3.3 that Plan is a subclass of Entity (and we do mention that Bundle and Collection are subclasses of Entity).
- review of prov-o july 3 2012 for last call (and its 104 raised feedback points)
- qualifiedXXX: shouldn't they be inverseFunctional? (luc's comment)
- Otherwise, this would allow for a given Influence instance, to be a qualified Influence for multiple subjects. This is not intended.
- The qualified pattern is prov-o specific. It was inverse functional before, but I think this characteristic was incorrectly removed.
- Stephan: not against it, but goal is to refelct the DM, so the DM should assert that it is inverse functional.
- influencer: should it be functional: there is only one influencer per qualified pattern instance, isn't there.
- hadPlan: is functional; hadUsage: is functional; hadGeneration: is functional; hadActivity: is functional
- TODO: Satya to help skim through, Stephan to skim but busy, David.
- qualifiedXXX: shouldn't they be inverseFunctional? (luc's comment)
- cross references links to DM, constraints, and N. (remove all but DM?)
- satya: remove to prov-n
- ... for constraints
- stephan: fine with removign to prov-n, since we're not trying to model the constraints
- david: sounds reasonable, constraints
- cross references links to DM, constraints, and N. (remove all but DM?)
- diagrams for examples (what is PROV conventions?)
- TODO: David to give it a shot.
- diagrams for examples (what is PROV conventions?)
- Luc's scan
- RDFa is bunk
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/336 pre-WD2 feedback
- These are editorial, and thus second priority before LC.
- prov:category and prov:component should be URIs, not literals (requires code, many filename dependencies across systems)
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#description-starting-point-terms
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#description-expanded-terms
- http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#description-qualified-terms
- Tim asked Luc to rename the following:
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#component1
- http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#component2
- https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/388 (tools and demos)
- https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/389 extensions to prov-o
Stephan
- Encouragement to link prov.owl to DM as much as possible.
- reviewing Role, Plan, and hadRole in gdoc
- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/456 superclass in domain union
Khalid
- highlighting focus terms in prov-o examples
- with strong HTML elements
Daniel
- 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.
Backburner
- Why can't we eat our own dogfood?
- How would you encode http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#acknowledgements in prov-o?