W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re: PROV-ISSUE-341 (revision-approver): revision approver - why? [prov-dm]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 04:20:29 +0000
To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EMEW3|378c98d88a0f45eceeb5b69fa1c2b056o3A5Ks08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4228AB6A-C583-4D1A-BCE6-7FB89FFC50E3@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Hi Tim,

Isn't it ISSUE-149 raised by Simon?

PS: the idea of removing agency from the Derivation component seems appealing!




Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science
University of Southampton 
Southampton SO17 1BJ
United Kingdom

On 10 Apr 2012, at 22:07, "Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:

> PROV-ISSUE-341 (revision-approver): revision approver - why? [prov-dm]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/341
> 
> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
> On product: prov-dm
> 
> 4.3.2
> 
> "responsibility: an optional  identifier (ag) for the agent who approved the newer entity as a variant of the older;"
> 
> ^^^ this seems more appropriately modeled as an account, not stuck as part of the underlying model.
> 
> Revision should "just be", and if one wants to know who says that "it just is", we should use accounts to answer.
> 
> The same experience that we used to remove "agent asserting an account" from "account" should be reapplied to this parameter as well.
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 04:21:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:07:03 GMT