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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-19: is this observable or not observable?

From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 08:19:46 -0700
Message-ID: <4DEE4192.2010007@ncl.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Carl and all,

it's a good start, in that it subsumes observing value of data, and therefore the state of a database, for example.
But we also need to observe /events/, don't we. For example, data that moves along a communication channel that connects two 
processors. Someone forwarding an online post. Or  responding to the post.

Also, in abstract, consider a state machine, "how did the machine reach state S" is a legitimate provenance query (methinks). Then I 
guess you may want to observe state transitions?

I see two possible complications:
  - not all transitions are observable (completeness of provenance)
  - observers may be unreliable (correctness of provenance)

--Paolo

On 6/7/11 7:51 AM, Carl Reed wrote:
> For what its worth, the following definitions are from several ISO documents
> for Observations and Measurements - which relate directly to the semantics
> of observable properties, such as for sensors.
>
> observation
>
> act of observing a property
>
> NOTE          The goal of an observation may be to measure or otherwise
> determine the value of a property
>
> property
>
> facet or attribute of an object referenced by a name
>
> [ISO 19143:2010, definition 4.21]
>
> EXAMPLE                              Abby's car has the colour red, where
> "colour red" is a property of the car instance
>
> And the one I enjoy: Observable - ability to be observed, possible to
> observe, and so forth. The use of "observable" in physics and quantum
> mechanics is very specific but essentially a sub-class of the general
> definition.
>
> Anyway, observables are properties such as "temperature", "height",
> "colour", "material".
>
> Cheers
>
> Carl
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Groth"<pgroth@gmail.com>
> To: "Luc Moreau"<L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
> Cc:<public-prov-wg@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 1:11 AM
> Subject: Re: PROV-ISSUE-19: is this observable or not observable?
>
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Can someone attempt to provide a clean notion of what observable and
>> non-observable mean in this context.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Paul
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Luc Moreau<L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
>> wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> When we discussed the notion of 'Invariant View or Perspective on a
>>> Thing,
>>> there were
>>> suggestions that it should be observable, and counter-suggestions that it
>>> should not be.
>>>
>>> It would be good to discuss both sides of the argument, in an attempt to
>>> reach consensus.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Luc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
-----------  ~oo~  --------------
Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK
http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:20:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:31 GMT