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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-7 (define-derivation): Definition for Concept 'Derivation' [Provenance Terminology]

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 07:37:46 +0100
Message-ID: <4DF06A3A.8040104@ninebynine.org>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
One might just delete the word "causal"?  The real essence is captured by "needs 
to have existed" IMO.

#g
--

Luc Moreau wrote:
> Hi Graham,
> 
> Thanks for the quote ;-)
> 
> Paulo, during the life of the Incubator, repeatedly criticized the 
> notion of "causal relationship".
> In what way is this causal?  It's a bit like using the term "influence" 
> discussed earlier.
> 
> Regards,
> Luc
> 
> On 08/06/11 18:47, Graham Klyne wrote:
>> I've added something based on OPM, which always made sense to me:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptDerivation#Definition_adapted_by_Graham 
>>
>>
>> #g
>> -- 
>>
>> Luc Moreau wrote:
>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2011 06:38:52 GMT

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