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

Re: use case agent

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:33:34 +0100
Message-ID: <B8B91B30-0C7C-4F34-9B6B-9AED24C5C254@vu.nl>
CC: "reza.bfar@oracle.com" <reza.bfar@oracle.com>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
To: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
I think convenience and interoperability are good reasons for the inclusion of constructs. But beyond that this issue was discussed at length and use cases were given.

Paul

On Feb 17, 2012, at 19:11, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote:

> And I could make a similar argument for insitu-sensing systems vs remote-sensing systems but the distinction would be for a domain and not relevant to a core provenance model.
> 
> I am trying to determine if there is any distinction between Agent, Human, and NonHuman in terms of the core provenance model.  If not, then we are creating classes whose only distinction exists for the domain-extensions.
> 
> If we want to do that, that is fine - but we should be aware that there is no reason the core model needs these classes - they are NOT necessary, they are simply a convenience.
> 
> --Stephan
> 
> On Feb 17, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Reza B'Far (Oracle) wrote:
> 
>> Stephan -
>> 
>> The differences and need for Human vs. NonHuman (Computing System, etc.) was enumerated at length on a few different threads previously.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Reza B'Far, EE, PE
>> Phone: 1.949.623.0452
>> Senior Development Director
>> Oracle USA
>> 17901 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 700
>> Irvine, CA 92614
>> 
>> On 2/17/12 9:52 AM, Stephan Zednik wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Feb 17, 2012, at 10:45 AM, Stephan Zednik wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Are there any differences in provenance attributes for Human vs NonHuman agents?
>>> I forgot to add:
>>> 
>>> or Human vs Agent or NonHuman vs Agent?
>>> 
>>>> Are there any provenance relations that apply specifically to Human or NonHuman agents but not both?
>>>> 
>>>> If not, then I would argue that from the perspective of the core provenance model there is no difference between a Human or NonHuman agent.  They are treated as simply Agents.
>>>> 
>>>> The distinction is relevant in the domain-specific interpretation of the provenance, but not to the provenance model itself.
>>>> 
>>>> --Stephan
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 17, 2012, at 6:03 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>> 
>>>>> At yesterday's call was an attempt at a proposal at renaming the agent classes for clarity, which seemed to have consensus on the email list but not on the call.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The discussion opened up to wider discussion on agents and there was a question on use cases on agent. I would like to note that there was already an issue raised and resolved around this typing. The issue defined several use cases and identified prior work. The issue was resolved by the introduction of the definition of agent and its types.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The ISSUE-134 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/134
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Paul
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
> 
Received on Friday, 17 February 2012 18:34:17 GMT

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