Hi Christoph, (01)
I've used this and know some of the authors well if that turns out to be
useful. (02)
Best, (03)
Elisa (04)
On 10/18/2013 3:39 AM, Christoph LANGE wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> 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.
>
> The following aspects of PROV make it a good candidate for an OntoIOp
> use case:
>
> * The data model is specified in an abstract way, in natural language
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/)
>
> * The main formal implementation of this data model is an OWL ontology
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/)
>
> * Further constraints shall be applied to any ABox of this ontology.
>
> * 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.
>
> 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.
>
> * 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christoph
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|