W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > July 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-30 (name-for-bob): What name do we use for the BOB construct? [Conceptual Model]

From: Ryan Golden <ryan.golden@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:19:47 -0500
Message-ID: <4E2DA5B3.7030408@oracle.com>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
+1.

I find this to match existing understanding of these terms 
<http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?o2=&o0=1&o8=1&o1=1&o7=&o5=&o9=&o6=&o3=&o4=&s=entity&i=1&h=10#c>.  
"Abstraction" is another option for the natural language description 
besides "thing," but I like "thing" just fine.

--Ryan

On 7/25/2011 3:39 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>
> The word 'Entity' should also be considered for the construct BOB.
>
> If we do so, the text 'characterized entity' should be replaced by 
> something else in the draft specification.
> Why not 'thing'?
>
>
> So, the text could become:
>
>  Section 4.
>  In the world (whether real or not), there are things, which can be 
> physical, digital, conceptual, or otherwise, and activities involving 
> things.
>  Words such as thing or activity should be understood with their 
> informal meaning.
>  This specification is concerned with characterized things, that is, 
> things and their situation in the world, as perceived by the asserter.
>
>  Section 5.1
>  An ENTITY represents an identifiable characterized thing.
>
>
> Luc
>
> On 07/24/2011 11:43 PM, Reza B'Far wrote:
>> First, for the record Khalid was the person suggesting Snapshot :)
>>
>> The way I've seen snapshot used commercially, it's fairly consistent 
>> with the current definition of BOB.  There is some murkiness on both 
>> sides (how "snapshot" is used commercially and I think we're still 
>> iterating here on the definition of BOB, but may be that's close to 
>> be finalized).  However, I think they are close enough.  What I liked 
>> about "Snapshot" is that its intuitive and is used in several domains 
>> that I know of (content management, legal, configuration systems, and 
>> I've also seen use-cases in microfilm production by old-school 
>> librarians).  Also, I think "Snapshot" offers a huge advantage that 
>> it's neither explicitly linked to the entity nor its state.  And I 
>> know the distinction between entity vs. entity's state and how that's 
>> articulated has been in a lot of the discussions.  Using "Snapshot" 
>> sort of obsoletes that discussion.
>>
>> On 7/24/11 12:57 PM, Stephan Zednik wrote:
>>> I am not partial to snapshot, partially because of the extensive 
>>> functional usage of the term.  I have always associated a snapshot 
>>> with a point in time, not a duration - but this may be an incorrect 
>>> association.
>>>
>>> I am open to discussing it, but my initial inclination was negative 
>>> towards it.
>>>
>>> Will we use the same definition as we have been using for BOB?
>>>
>>> --Stephan
>>>
>>> On Jul 24, 2011, at 9:52 AM, "Reza B'Far"<reza.bfar@oracle.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> I second the term "Snapshot".  This term also has functional usage 
>>>> in several commercial application categories used within roughly 
>>>> the same meaning.
>>>>
>>>> On 7/24/11 3:45 AM, Khalid Belhajjame wrote:
>>>>> Hi Stephan,
>>>>>
>>>>> Given the example you gave in your previous email, I think that 
>>>>> "EntitySpanshot" or "Snapshot" should be fine, given that it 
>>>>> reflect the fact that it is a description of an entity that holds 
>>>>> for some period of time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you agree?
>>>>>
>>>>> khalid
>>>>>
>>>>> On 23/07/2011 20:24, Stephan Zednik wrote:
>>>>>> I do not feel that EntityInstance, EntityInstantiation, or 
>>>>>> InstantiatedEntity make sense for the book ownership scenario, or 
>>>>>> any scenario modeling the provenance of changes in 
>>>>>> characteristics of a physical object.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To reiterate the example since I haven't committed it to a wiki 
>>>>>> page yet.  Book X is an entity that represents a real world 
>>>>>> object.  It can be put on a shelf, loaned to friends, damaged, 
>>>>>> and/or destroyed.  It has important characteristics (condition, 
>>>>>> ownership, location, etc) that may change over the life of the 
>>>>>> book.  We may want to represent the provenance of the book as a 
>>>>>> chain of ownership.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> |<----------------------------------------------------- Book X 
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------->|
>>>>>> |<!------ Book X with owner A ---->|<----Book X with owner B 
>>>>>> ---->|<---- Book X with owner A --------->|
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If a book changes ownership, is the "book with changed ownership" 
>>>>>> a different EntityInstance?  A different InstantiatedEntity?  I 
>>>>>> don't think what we current call a BOB is an 'instance of' 
>>>>>> anything.  I think of it as a description of an entity that holds 
>>>>>> for some time period (not necessarily given) for which 
>>>>>> contextually important mutable characteristics of the the entity 
>>>>>> are held to be known.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Stephan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/22/2011 5:29 AM, Curt Tilmes wrote:
>>>>>>> On 07/22/2011 03:43 AM, Khalid Belhajjame wrote:
>>>>>>>> The term "Snapshot" was suggested some time ago, and it seems that
>>>>>>>> several people did like it.
>>>>>>>> We can also use the term "EntitySnapshot".
>>>>>>> Following from snapshot:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> EntityInstance
>>>>>>> EntityInstantiation
>>>>>>> InstantiatedEntity
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Curt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Received on Monday, 25 July 2011 17:20:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:37 GMT