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

Re: PROPOSALS TO VOTE ON (deadline: Wednesday 14th, midnight GMT)

From: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:19:16 +0100
Message-ID: <CAExK0DfhmTuXOfksmr5HMWjeOfAUKV-_FQ-YV6aJ1ELgesR6-g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
2012/3/9 Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>

> Dear all,
>
> Find three proposals to vote on. They are intended to simplify the data
> model.
> The proposals are related to ISSUE-207 (start/end), ISSUE-206, and
> ISSUE-204(end of entity).
>
> If you have issues with them, please raise them promptly, since we are
> keen to have these
> resolved by the next teleconference on Thursday.
>
> They all appear in
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/**raw-file/default/model/**
> working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-misc.**html<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-misc.html>
>
> Please express your vote for each proposal separately:
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/**raw-file/default/model/**
> working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-misc.**html#proposal1<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-misc.html#proposal1>
>

+0. I like more "expiration", but depending on the context it might not be
appropriate. Can an entity
be generated with an expiration/invalidation date, ot is this out of the
scope of the group?

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/**raw-file/default/model/**
> working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-misc.**html#proposal2<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-misc.html#proposal2>
>
One question: the proposed definition aims to formulate the start/end of
activities independently from an agent.
However, the trigger is an entity, and agents are entities. Hence, I could
still say who is responsible for start of the activity:

activity(ex:foot_race)
agent(ex:DarthVader)
wasStartedBy(ex:foot_race,ex:DarthVader,2012-03-09T08:05:08-05:00)
Would that be correct? Because it would simplify things. (You can bear
responsability to an agent if you want).
If this is the intent, then +1 (it would be nice to show it with an
example in the proposal).

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/**raw-file/default/model/**
> working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-misc.**html#proposal3<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-misc.html#proposal3>
>
+1. This avoids having "phantom agents" as the note in the proposal is
suggesting.

Thanks,
Daniel

>
> Hopefully, this is one of last batch of proposals before WD5.
>
> Regards,
> Luc
>
> --
> 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<http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/%7Elavm>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 12 March 2012 11:19:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:58 GMT