Re: PROV-ISSUE-1: a proposal to vote on

+ 1

I agree with the wording, but think this is something that might  
benefit from (lightweight) formalization sooner rather than later.  In  
fact, I think we are beginning to get to that stage with many of the  
concepts.

--James

On Jun 6, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:

>
> Dear all,
>
> You will recall we failed to reach consensus on the following  
> proposal at the last teleconference:
>  "in a first instance, to define the necessary concepts that allow  
> us to express the provenance
> of a thing that does not change".  Kai, Jim and Satya then expressed  
> concerns, which can be
> summarized as, this proposal provides no route to handle mutable  
> things.
>
> After a long email discussion with them over the WE, we have  
> converged towards a better
> proposal:
>
> In a first instance, to define the necessary concepts that allow us  
> to express the provenance of
> an invariant view or perspective on a thing.
>
> What is important to note is that it is the view/perspective that  
> does not change, the thing
> itself can be mutable.
>
> To allow us to progress, can you express by +1/-1/0 your support for  
> this proposal?
>
> Best regards,
> Luc
> -- 
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
> University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
> Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
> United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm