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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-368 (no-responsibility-in-derivation): No responsibility in derivation [prov-dm]

From: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 09:12:10 +0100
Message-Id: <917C5B99-CD41-4B83-B3C3-7723D635A1A2@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: "<public-prov-wg@w3.org>" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
+1

Jun

Sent from my iPad

On 30 Apr 2012, at 11:41, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:

> PROV-ISSUE-368 (no-responsibility-in-derivation): No responsibility in derivation [prov-dm]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/368
> 
> Raised by: Luc Moreau
> On product: prov-dm
> 
> 
> We are having ongoing discussion about responsibility in derivations (see ISSUE-357 and ISSUE-352).
> 
> In the spirit of simplification, I would like to suggest that agents should not be mentioned in derivation relations. 
> 
> Instead of
> wasRevisionOf(id,e2,e1,ag,attrs)
> we should write
> wasRevisionOf(id,e2,e1,attrs)
> and  wasAttributedTo(e2,ag)
> 
> 
> Instead of
> wasQuotedFrom(id,e2,e1,ag2,ag1,attrs)
> we should write:
> wasQuotedFrom(id,e2,e1,attrs)
> and  wasAttributedTo(e1,ag1)
> and  wasAttributedTo(e2,ag2)
> 
> 
> 
> We are not losing in expressivity, I believe, instead, we decouple components 2 and 3 in the data model.
> 
> Furthermore, if we allow optional arguments in derivations,
> wasDerivedFrom(id, e2, e1, a, g2, u1, attrs)
> they should also be allowed in quotation/original source/revision, to
> make these proper subrelations.
> 
> Cheers,
> Luc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2012 14:52:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 1 May 2012 14:52:45 GMT