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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-89 (what-entity-attributes): How do we find the attributes of an entity? [Formal Model]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 11:26:54 -0400
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <AB773D8B-BA28-4A34-AB0E-1932E17AD34D@rpi.edu>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Luc,

I'm looking to close this issue.

"proper" provenance is not part of the current prov-o WD.

As you know, the building story in prov-o is "starting points, expanded, qualified" and then "collections".

Since the notion of "proper" has evolved since F2F2, could you summarize what aspects you think should still be addressed in prov-o?
For me, the notion of proper hinges around specOf, where "improper" asserters assert details on less specific entities than they should.

Thanks,
Tim


On Mar 5, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:

> Hi Tim,
> 
> I think that somewhere in the prov-o html document, there should be a section
> that talks about "proper" provenance (or whatever its name is), and discusses attributes.
> So, as long as we remember to discuss this, I think we can close the issue.
> 
> Luc
> 
> On 05/03/12 22:06, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>> On Mar 5, 2012, at 4:42 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> 
>>   
>>> Hi Tim,
>>> 
>>> Indeed, we no longer make the distinction between characterizing and non-characterizing attributes.
>>> 
>>> In "proper" provenance, attributes are still very important, since they help describe a "partial state".
>>> Hence, some constraints exist around attributes:
>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm-constraints.html#account-and-accountEntity
>>> (For instance, see 3rd bullet point).
>>>     
>> Yes, the 3rd bullet and "It is not permitted to add new attributes to a given entity" in the note.
>> 
>>   
>>> But I think we came to the conclusion that any rdf property for an entity is regarded as an attribute.
>>>     
>> 
>> 
>>   
>>> Isn't it the answer to this issue?
>>>     
>> I hope that it is. I am comfortable with the phrasing in the DM.
>> Any rdf property outside of the prov namespace that describes and Entity is "fixed".
>> (as you noted, we can "use" it again, so that would make a new attribute within the prov namespace but that did not affect the partial state.)
>> 
>> 
>> Does this mean we can close the issue? Do we need the DM to say something further in light of this ISSUE?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -Tim
>> 
>> 
>>   
>>> Cheers,
>>> Luc
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 05/03/12 19:13, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>>>     
>>>> Luc,
>>>> 
>>>> The distinction between characterizing attributes and non-characterizing attributes has faded in the latest versions of the DM.
>>>> 
>>>> Do you still have concerns about being able to find "frozen" attributes for a given entity?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tim
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 2, 2011, at 4:52 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>       
>>>>> PROV-ISSUE-89 (what-entity-attributes): How do we find the attributes of an entity? [Formal Model]
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/89
>>>>> 
>>>>> Raised by: Luc Moreau
>>>>> On product: Formal Model
>>>>> 
>>>>> The conceptual model defines an entity in terms of an identifier and a list of attribute-value pairs. It is indeed crucial for the asserter to identify the attributes that have been frozen in a given entity.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Currently, the ontology does not seem to identify these attributes.
>>>>> 
>>>>> To say that these attributes could be found by looking at all the properties for this entity does not work with an open world assumption.
>>>>> 
>>>>> What mechanism do we have to identify these attributes?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>         
>>>> 
>>>>       
>>>     
>>   
> 
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 15:31:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 May 2012 15:31:00 GMT