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: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:08:41 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|8f2afd547bbd9aabd4016f6b2f3ef712o0GN8k08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F15FF79.20400@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Thanks Daniel,

Tim, Could you confirm and reassign to prov-o?

Thanks,
Luc

On 17/01/12 11:28, Daniel Garijo wrote:
> Hi Luc,
> maybe this issue is more for the prov-o document than for prov-dm.
> Currently, wasAttributedTo is binary. We should add a QualifiedInvolvement
> for this relationship too in order to be able to add the set of 
> optional attributes.
>
> Daniel
>
> 2012/1/17 Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk 
> <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>>
>
>     Hi Tim,
>
>     Revisiting your request, I don't understand it.
>     An attribution record already contains optional attribute-value pairs.
>     What do you mean by qualified wasAttributedTo relation?
>
>     Thanks,
>     Luc
>
>
>     On 01/16/2012 02:31 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>
>         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
>     <tel:%2B44%2023%208059%204487>
>     University of Southampton          fax: +44 23 8059 2865
>     <tel:%2B44%2023%208059%202865>
>     Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
>     <mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
>     United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
>     <http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/%7Elavm>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 23:09:28 UTC

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