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

Re: Issue 89 - why?

From: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 11:55:23 +0100
Message-ID: <4E747C9B.7050807@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
CC: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On 17/09/2011 08:07, Graham Klyne wrote:
> I've been reading some of the discussion of Issue 89:
>
>   http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/89
>
> which seems to my mind be getting rather like a counting of 
> angels-on-pinheads, and I wonder if we're not in danger of 
> over-ontologizing here.
>
> Going back to the original issue, I see:
>
> [[
> The conceptual model defines an entity in terms of an identifier and a 
> list of attribute-value pairs. It is indeed crucial for the asserter 
> to identify the attributes that have been frozen in a given entity.
> ]]
>
> Why is it so crucial to identify what attributes have been frozen?
>
> What practical application of provenance is prevented is we don't 
> require this?
>

I second that. Furthermore, I don't see the point of declaring 
attributes that are not instanciated in the context of the entity.

Khalid

> #g
> -- 
>
>
Received on Saturday, 17 September 2011 10:55:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:41 GMT