- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 11:00:56 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi all, Another perspective on derivation: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptDerivation#Definition_by_Luc Luc On 06/08/2011 10:33 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > > Hi Paul and Daniel. > > On 06/08/2011 10:13 AM, Paul Groth wrote: >> Hi Luc, all: >> >> Is it really necessary to go down this road of defining influence. I >> have this fear that we will never bottom out. > > Agreed. >> >> There are certain concepts that need to be defined terminologically >> others may not. It depends on what are the core building blocks of >> the model are. > > I suppose we wouldn't want the standard model to be over-constraining, > to allow for many forms of derivations (in physical, digital, > conceptual contexts). > > So, what are the (minimum) properties that need to be satisfied in > order to qualify as a derivation? > > Luc >> >> Paul >> >> Luc Moreau wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Having identified a concept of Invariant View or Perspective on >>> Thing (IVPT), I'd like to go back >>> to the meaning of Derivation. >>> >>> Several of you indicated that Derivation expresses that one IVPT was >>> influenced by another IVPT. >>> >>> Paolo has asked what does it mean to 'influence'? It's a good question! >>> >>> Will we be able to define a notion of influence that applies for all >>> things, >>> whether physical, digital, conceptual, or other? Should we go down >>> the road of >>> modelling influence in specific domains? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Luc >>> >>> >>> >>> On 27/05/11 20:34, Stephan Zednik wrote: >>>> >>>> On May 27, 2011, at 5:04 AM, Daniel Garijo wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Luc, all >>>>> In the example c2 is also a derivation of d2, and from my point of >>>>> view, >>>>> c2 could also be seen as a derivation from c1, since it is the >>>>> chart taken as reference >>>>> and corected in c2... >>>>> >>>>> As for your second question, I think that if we want to be able to >>>>> cover >>>>> provenance from resources, resources representations and resources >>>>> state >>>>> representation, a derivation must be able to refer to all of them. >>>>> >>>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>> From the existing example/scenario section on Derivation: >>>> >>>> A derivation is a relation between two Resource State >>>> Representations that expresses that one RSR was influenced by the >>>> other RSR. >>>> >>>> A agree that a derivation should be a relation between two like >>>> resource abstractions, and I agree with Daniel in that I am not >>>> sure we should limit it to RSR. I believe one Resource could be >>>> derived from another Resource, and same with Resource State. I >>>> also believe derivation covers a large spectrum of relationships - >>>> FRBR has covered some of this ground on the wide spectrum of >>>> different types of derivation so thankfully we do not have to start >>>> from scratch. Stories can be derived from other stores, editions of >>>> publications are derived from earlier editions, adaptions are >>>> derived works, translations are derived expressions, etc. >>>> >>>> I suggest an quick overview of FRBR's conclusions on derivations to >>>> provide direction. >>>> >>>> I also agree with the suggestion that Version be a specialization / >>>> subtype of Derivation, as suggested in the Version section of the >>>> existing example/scenario. >>>> >>>> --Stephan >>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Daniel >>>>> >>>>> 2011/5/27 Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk >>>>> <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> Over the last week, we debated the notion of resource >>>>> (PROV-ISSUE-1), >>>>> one of the concepts identified in the charter as core to a >>>>> provenance >>>>> data model. It would be good to discuss the notion of derivation. >>>>> >>>>> Do we agree with the illustration of derivation [1]: >>>>> in the example, chart c1 is a derivation of data set d1. >>>>> Are there other interesting illustrations? >>>>> >>>>> Is derivation relating resources/resource >>>>> representations/resource >>>>> representation states? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Luc >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/CharterConceptsIllustration >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 05/20/2011 08:07 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> PROV-ISSUE-7 (define-derivation): Definition for Concept >>>>> 'Derivation' [Provenance Terminology] >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/7 >>>>> >>>>> Raised by: Luc Moreau >>>>> On product: Provenance Terminology >>>>> >>>>> The Provenance WG charter identifies the concept >>>>> 'Derivation' as a core concept of the provenance interchange >>>>> language to be standardized (see >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/01/prov-wg-charter). >>>>> >>>>> What term do we adopt for the concept 'Derivation'? >>>>> How do we define the concept 'Derivation'? >>>>> Where does concept 'Derivation' appear in ProvenanceExample? >>>>> Which provenance query requires the concept 'Derivation'? >>>>> >>>>> Wiki page: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptDerivation >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- 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 <mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> >>>>> United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm >>>>> <http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/%7Elavm> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> > -- 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
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 10:04:21 UTC