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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-257 (TLebo): rename "Account"/"Bundle"/"AccountEntity" to "Provenance" [prov-dm]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:07:56 -0500
Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <CE3D2A1D-567C-4DFF-87AC-99E42FAEE2BB@rpi.edu>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
They are both Accounts.

Your AccountEntities are specializationsOf (or alternatesOf) Accounts (depending on what you are modeling) and do not need to be named differently to be so.


Also, a principal aspect of this issue is to rename Account to Provenance.

Tim



On Feb 22, 2012, at 6:34 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:

> Hi Tim,
> 
> How do you name "Account" appearing in [2], which is a notion that differs from AccountEntity in [1]?
> 
> [2] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/prov-dm-constraints.html#account-and-accountEntity
> 
> Luc
> 
> On 22/02/2012 17:21, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> PROV-ISSUE-257 (TLebo): rename "Account"/"Bundle"/"AccountEntity" to "Provenance" [prov-dm]
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/257
>> 
>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>> On product: prov-dm
>> 
>> Our latest stab [1] at defining "Account"/"Bundle"/"AccountEntity" is:
>> 
>> "An AccountEntity is an entity that contains a bundle of provenance assertions."
>> 
>> I propose to name this concept "Provenance":
>> 
>> "Provenance is an entity that groups provenance assertions."
>> 
>> (or, to avoid using "provenance" in its own definition: "Provenance is an entity that groups assertions about involvements among Entities and Activities.")
>> 
>> This has a simplicity, naturalness, and even eloquence. When one says "Let me check the provenance", they are saying "Let me look at the assertions made about some thing".
>> 
>> Further, it plainly addresses how one asserts Provenance of Provenance, since Provenance is an Entity.
>> 
>> The fact that Provenance is an Entity also resolves many challenges that I've faced with respect to an "Account"'s specialization. Asserters may choose the level of abstraction they wish, which can be reconciled with those that demand different levels of abstraction. For example, are you querying a particular File on a particular machine to get the provenance, or are you looking at the abstract RDF graph that exists in MANY files (and one of which may have changed). Both are handled and can be used, and coherently associated using specialization.
>> 
>> This also provides an opportunity to extend Provenance to the original notions of Account (which I say we leave for others to do). For example, :what_I_did_yesterday a prov:Provenance; prov:wasAssociatedWith :TBL .
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>> 
>> 
>> [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/towards-wd4.html#section-types-entities-agents
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>   
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 05:08:27 GMT

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