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

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

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:53:46 -0400
Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <2D598970-9728-44A2-86B7-261673B3CD73@rpi.edu>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
It appears so.

What was the resolution to that?
Because the problem Simon describes is still in the draft.

-Tim

On Apr 11, 2012, at 12:20 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:

> 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 18:54:17 GMT

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