ontoiop-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

[ontoiop-forum] Interesting use case for OntoIOp: W3C PROV (provenance)

To: ontoiop-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Christoph LANGE <math.semantic.web@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 11:39:55 +0100
Message-id: <52610FFB.5000906@xxxxxxxxx>
Hi all,    (01)

I just learned about a recent W3C standard that will form a very
interesting use case for OntoIOp.  PROV
(http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-overview/) is a 2013 recommendation for a
provenance data model.    (02)

The following aspects of PROV make it a good candidate for an OntoIOp
use case:    (03)

* The data model is specified in an abstract way, in natural language 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/)    (04)

* The main formal implementation of this data model is an OWL ontology 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/)    (05)

* Further constraints shall be applied to any ABox of this ontology.    (06)

   * The normative specification of these constraints is in first order
   rule pseudo code (http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-constraints/); at a
   first glance I believe these rules are monotonic.
   * In an informative annex, the same has been specified in formal
   first-order logic (on paper: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-sem/).  James
   Cheney, the author of that, told me that they had done a Prolog
   implementation, but not an implementation for an actual FOL
   _reasoner_ so far, e.g. nothing in Common Logic.    (07)

   Recall that to some of you I had earlier mentioned SKOS as an
   interesting use case, as it is also specified as an OWL ontology with
   informally stated FOL constraints.  PROV is similar but much more
   comprehensive.    (08)

* There is an informative translation of the PROV OWL ontology to a
   less comprehensive but more widely used ontology, namely the Dublin
   Core RDFS ontology (http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dc/).  This ontology
   translation is expressed partly by a symbol mapping and partly by
   FOL rules.  These FOL rules are implemented by SPARQL CONSTRUCT
   patterns (e.g.
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-dc-20130430/#dct-creator).
   FYI: SPARQL CONSTRUCT is a popular and immediately executable syntax for
   RDF→RDF translation rules in a subset of FOL.  I do not off the top
   of my head know its relation to RIF; intuitively I think it
   translates to a subset of monotonic RIF, but formally this
   translation hasn't been implemented.    (09)

As a part of my new job I will be collaborating in a EU project
(http://www.diachron-fp7.eu/) that is concerned with data evolution
and provenance and therefore also with data provenance, so I will have
good contacts to evolve this use case.    (010)

Please let me know what you think about this as a use case.  If you
want, I can condense the above write-up into a paragraph for the RFP. 
(And if so we might want to continue that aspect of the discussion on 
ontoiop-wg.)    (011)

Cheers,    (012)

Christoph    (013)

-- 
Christoph Lange, School of Computer Science, University of Birmingham
http://cs.bham.ac.uk/~langec/, Skype duke4701    (014)

→ Mathematics in Computer Science Special Issue on “Enabling Domain
   Experts to use Formalised Reasoning”; submission until 31 October.
   http://cs.bham.ac.uk/research/projects/formare/pubs/mcs-doform/    (015)

_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontoiop-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontoiop-forum/  
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontoiop-forum/ 
Community Files (open): http://interop.cim3.net/file/pub/OntoIOp/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntoIOp    (016)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>