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

Re: vocabulary simplification: two proposals to vote on [deadline, Oct 26 midnight, GMT]

From: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:56:27 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAtgn=T=XiNL-t6HvR4gRT41HKp9YV4qyS+_N+pmm-sw=BYRHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paolo Ncl <paolo.missier@newcastle.ac.uk>
Cc: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Then not Event. But I think a key goal of our work is to find terms
that align best with the intended usage. This makes it much easier for
people who are coming to the model for the first time. It's perfect
that we've started with concepts, but these concepts are being
grounded in terminology, and that should align with the chosen,
default language.

If someone can give me a counterexample where an act or activity
doesn't have an implied actor, I'll withdraw my negative vote.

Jim

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Paolo Ncl
<paolo.missier@newcastle.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think we are in fact reading a bit too much into this. The intent was to simplify and harmonize the key terms used in the model.  an agent may play a part in the activity, and we do have a way to express that, but that doesn't have to be (does that mean we cater to eastern cultures as well? :-) )
> But I strongly advise against using the term "event" to refer to activities that have a time duration. Events already have a clear role to play in the model, and have no duration.
>
> Thanks, Paolo
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 26 Oct 2011, at 15:05, Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> JimMcC indicated that activity implied a notion of agency. I am not familiar
>>> with this
>>> interpretation. Where does it come from? He suggests 'event', but this term
>>> is already in
>>> the document (and will be the subject of a future clarification proposal).
>>
>> Activity (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/activity) is
>> defined as a quality or state of being active. If you look at the
>> examples at MW, all of them have some sort of agent or actor. There is
>> one natural process example, which is that a volcano is active. Even
>> in that case, the volcano is being considered an actor (which is fine
>> in discourse, but isn't technically correct). The root word, "act",
>> when used, requires an actor. An act can happen with an unknown actor,
>> but there is always an entity that is behind an act.
>>
>> Using this word to describe all events (including natural events),
>> especially formally in a standard, gives the model a pre-scientific
>> bais (the idea that a prime mover is needed, because all events are
>> acts). Note that this is actually a western bais too, as many eastern
>> traditions do not require a prime mover.
>>
>> Maybe I'm reading far too much into this, but if we're looking to
>> simplify, I would far prefer Event or Process (but with a clear
>> explanation that it is a occurrent, not a specification of an
>> occurrent) to Activity.
>>
>> Jim
>> --
>> Jim McCusker
>> Programmer Analyst
>> Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
>> Yale School of Medicine
>> james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330
>> http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu
>>
>> PhD Student
>> Tetherless World Constellation
>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
>> mccusj@cs.rpi.edu
>> http://tw.rpi.edu
>>
>
>



-- 
Jim McCusker
Programmer Analyst
Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
Yale School of Medicine
james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330
http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu

PhD Student
Tetherless World Constellation
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
mccusj@cs.rpi.edu
http://tw.rpi.edu
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:57:18 GMT

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