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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-189: Section 5.2.4 (PROV-DM as on Nov 28) [prov-dm]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 08:07:27 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|10623c93634a689d9f1cfdbf7bdf7414o1C87U08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F38C4BF.20109@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu>
CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Satya,

I am closing this issue now.

By meta-provenance, I suppose you mean provenance of provenance. The way 
of doing it
is by means of accounts.

I don't see how notes specifically help for that (attributes already 
exist for every element and
relation and could be used to that end too).

Luc

On 02/12/2012 12:49 AM, Satya Sahoo wrote:
> Hi Luc,
> The updated description helps and I am fine with closing the issue at 
> present.
>
> Can you please clarify, whether the note records are meta-provenance?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best,
> Satya
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk 
> <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Satya,
>
>     Text regarding attributes occurring in notes was changed as suggested.
>     What do you think?
>     Cheers,
>     Luc
>
>
>     On 08/12/11 09:48, Luc Moreau wrote:
>
>         Hi Satya,
>         Response interleaved.
>
>         On 12/07/2011 02:00 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker
>         wrote:
>
>             PROV-ISSUE-189: Section 5.2.4 (PROV-DM as on Nov 28) [prov-dm]
>
>             http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/189
>
>             Raised by: Satya Sahoo
>             On product: prov-dm
>
>             Hi,
>             The following are my comments for Section 5.2.4 of the
>             PROV-DM (as on Nov 28):
>
>             Section 5.2.4 Note Record
>             1. "Attribute-value pairs occurring in notes differ from
>             attribute-value pairs occurring in entity records and
>             activity records. In entity and activity records,
>             attribute-value pairs must be a representation of
>             something in the world, which remain constant for the
>             duration of the characterization interval (for entity
>             record) or the activity duration (for activity records).
>             In note records, it is optional for attribute-value pairs
>             to be representations of something in the world. If they
>             are a representation of something in the world, then it
>             may change value for the corresponding duration. If
>             attribute-value pairs of a note record are a
>             representation of something in the world that does not
>             change, they are not regarded as determining
>             characteristics of an entity or activity, for the purpose
>             of provenance."
>
>             Comments: The primary issue is - how is note record
>             enabling provenance representation or interchange over and
>             above the set of terms and relations defined by PROV-DM?
>
>
>         I really see this as an annotation mechanism, to add extra
>         information over an existing set of records.
>         I think it's important to have it for interoperability,
>         otherwise, we have now easy way of enriching an exist
>         provenance record.
>
>             If attribute-value pairs are determining characteristics
>             of an Entity or Activity and also help in rendering them -
>             are they not Note Record? For a common user or
>             application, how do they determine if a set of
>             attribute-value pairs are determining characteristics of
>             an Entity or Activity? Would the original author of
>             provenance assertions have to be around to convey this
>             information to users or consumers of provenance information?
>
>
>         I agree the text is not straightforward,.
>
>         We were also trying to avoid the distinction between
>         determining and non-determining characteristic. So it needs
>         rephrasing.
>
>
>         Maybe, we should write something:
>
>         A note record associated with an entity record consist of
>         attribute-value pairs which may or may not represent the
>         entity's situation in the world.
>         If a note record's attribute-value pair represents an entity's
>         situation is world, no requirement is made on this situation
>         to be unchanged for the entitys' characterization interval.
>
>             E.g.
>             entity (e1, [resolution: 1080p, format: UTF-8])
>             How does a user or software application intrepret that the
>             attribute pairs [resolution: 1080p, format: UTF-8] are
>             determining characteristics of e1 or not?
>             Further, what is meant by "...something in the world"?
>             Section 2.1.1 describes world as "...the world (whether
>             real or not), there are things, which can be physical,
>             digital, conceptual, or otherwise, and activities
>             involving things." - so what IS something in the world and
>             what is NOT something in the world?
>
>
>         resolution: 1080p, format: UTF-8 are supposed to hold during
>         the duration of the entity interval.
>
>
>         Luc
>
>             Thanks.
>
>             Best,
>             Satya
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 08:07:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:56 GMT