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

Re: Different senses of specialization

From: Curt Tilmes <Curt.Tilmes@nasa.gov>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:43:45 -0400
Message-ID: <4F870641.8000900@nasa.gov>
To: <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On 04/12/2012 09:14 AM, Tom De Nies wrote:
> This further simplifies the definition of alternateOf and
> specializationOf. Then I would propose something like this:
>
> alternateOf: Two entities are alternates if they are the same thing,
> but their situation in the world is described by different
> attribute-value pairs.
>
> specializationOf: An entity is a specialization of another entity if
> they are the same thing, and the description of the situation in the
> world of the former includes all of the attribute-value pairs of the
> latter, and at least one more.

Interestingly, this accommodates my provenance equivalence example:

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Apr/0133.html

The "same thing" isn't always well-defined.  Is the wood the "same
thing" as the chair?

In my example, file x and y have a significant number of AV pairs in
common.  Is that enough that for some definition of "same thing", they
are indeed the same thing?


I like these definitions for their simplicity and the almost
mechanical way you can determine them.  They just depend on the
definition of "same thing".  If we leave that open to the provenance
describer to determine, this could accomodate whatever use cases were
needed.

In my example, I could make that call and assert that since they were
produced by an equivalent application of a reproducible process, the
files should be equivalent and therefore specializationsOf some ideal
thing and therefore x is alternateOf y.

Curt
Received on Thursday, 12 April 2012 16:44:24 GMT

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