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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-216 (TLebo): qualified wasAttributedTo? [prov-dm]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:31:55 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|953540a9d664816716222a36537b4fa9o0FEVw08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F1434DB.5060701@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Tim,
This seems like a reasonable request.
It looks like all our relations should have attributes.
Luc

On 01/15/2012 04:37 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-216 (TLebo): qualified wasAttributedTo? [prov-dm]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/216
>
> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
> On product: prov-dm
>
> Accounts will likely be associated to their asserters with the prov:wasAttributedTo binary relation.
>
> Would the DM be able to have qualified wasAttributedTo relations?
>
> I think that it would be a natural question for a consumer, upon hearing that "account x was from agent y", to want to ask about how, when, or in what situation agent y stated those things (e.g., under oath in a courtroom, on twitter 2am on a Friday night, etc).
>
> Hopefully, the Qualified wasAttributedTo would follow the pattern of the varying "precisions" (i.e., granularity) for wasDerivedFrom, which may relate an activity that draws the Account to the asserter.
>
> Thanks,
> Tim
>
>
>
>    

-- 
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, 16 January 2012 14:32:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:11 UTC