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

RE: prov-issue-11: what is version?

From: Myers, Jim <MYERSJ4@rpi.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 10:41:00 -0400
Message-ID: <B7376F3FB29F7E42A510EB5026D99EF20534A9B9@troy-be-ex2.win.rpi.edu>
To: Simon Miles <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
I would not push for it, and I think a 'profile' in the sense of the Dublin Core one for OPM - just map an existing vocabulary rather than inventing one, would be preferable. The mutli-level FRBR could be another option to straight versioning. 

 Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-prov-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-prov-wg-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Simon Miles
> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 10:37 AM
> To: Provenance Working Group WG
> Subject: Re: prov-issue-11: what is version?
> 
> OK, but I think that defining it generally even in a profile may go too far.
> Given that "version" means quite different things in different application
> contexts, as I think you capture by the notion of typed process executions in
> your definition, is there a value in defining it generally at all? I could imagine
> it may be defined in various ways in a few different domain-specific profiles,
> and there could be a mappings from the PIL model to version in DC and
> elsewhere etc., but defining it as part of the model seems to help no-one
> while adding to the complexity. This differs from time, where though it has
> different conceptions in different domains, I could imagine a default
> conception defined in a profile would be useful for applying the model to
> common kinds of web resource.
> 
> Thanks,
> Simon
> 
> On 28 June 2011 15:25, Myers, Jim <MYERSJ4@rpi.edu> wrote:
> > I was just trying to use version as an example of IVP in the last email,
> hence it shouldn't be different. Looking at whether we need version explicitly
> as a concept - perhaps it is a 'profile' like time...
> >
> >  Jim
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: public-prov-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-prov-wg-
> >> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Simon Miles
> >> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 10:18 AM
> >> To: Provenance Working Group WG
> >> Subject: Re: prov-issue-11: what is version?
> >>
> >> Luc, Jim,
> >>
> >> I notice that you two take different views on what the concept
> >> "version" is intended to describe. With the example things:
> >>   T1. The government data
> >>   T2. The government data with incorrect values
> >>   T3. The government data with corrected values Under Luc's
> >> definition T3 is a version of T2, but under Jim's definition T3 is a version
> of T1.
> >>
> >> I'm not clear that "version", under either definition, is beneficial
> >> to keep in the model. Jim's definition seems to be only subtley if at
> >> all different from IPVT, while Luc's is distinct but just a simple
> >> composition of other concepts which could be recognised by any query.
> >>
> >> My counter-proposal would be to remove "version" from the model.
> >> Simplicity of the standard is surely a good thing where possible.
> >>
> >> If that is unacceptable, I think that Luc's definition makes sense
> >> but would be more clearly called "is revision of" or similar.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Simon
> >>
> >> On 27 June 2011 16:11, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > Exploiting the  most recent definitions of Derivation and IVP of, I
> >> > tried to propose a definition of version.
> >> > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptVersion#Definition_by_Luc
> >> >
> >> > What do you think?
> >> > 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
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> ______________________________________________________________
> >> ________
> >> > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security
> System.
> >> > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> >> >
> >>
> ______________________________________________________________
> >> ________
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Dr Simon Miles
> >> Lecturer, Department of Informatics
> >> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
> >> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
> >
> >
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> ________
> > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> ________
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Dr Simon Miles
> Lecturer, Department of Informatics
> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 14:41:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:32 GMT