W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > January 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: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:17:09 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|04b554f2e820db115c25af6ec053987eo0GNHF08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F160175.4030706@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Satya,

Text regarding attributes occurring in notes was changed as suggested.
What do you think?

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
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 23:17:48 UTC

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