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

PROV-ISSUE-130 (YolandaGil): Definition and examples of "agent" should be clarified in Provenance Data Model (PROV-DM) Draft [Data Model]

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 18:41:41 +0000
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1RGxYj-00018H-Au@lowblow.w3.org>

PROV-ISSUE-130 (YolandaGil): Definition and examples of "agent" should be clarified in Provenance Data Model (PROV-DM) Draft [Data Model]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/130

Raised by: Yolanda Gil
On product: Data Model

In Section 3, "agents" are defined as capable of controlling a process.  This is a key concept, and I still have trouble with that definition.  In later examples you have the Royal Society, I think it is important that we explain that if Carol runs the process and works for the Royal Society it may be more important that the RS run it rather than Carol herself.  IMHO (and I brought this up at some call weeks ago), the notion of agent must be tied to a participating entity (as described in Section 5.3.8) who is noted in the provenance record to be accountable (or if that is too legalistic a term, one could say responsible) for the action.  In any case, the current definition should be better supported by examples, like the Royal society one.  

Also, section 4.1/4.2 has examples of agents but they are all people (all 5 of them), perhaps a good thing would be to broaden the example to illustrate better what can be considered agents.
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2011 18:41:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:46 GMT