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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 16:17:00 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|40a77f051833ad9a9427cf189bdb1a8do4EGH508L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4FB2736C.4040500@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Sorry, for the confusing message.

The text currently says:
  An agent MAY be a particular type of entity.


Instead, I am proposing that we write:
  An agent MAY be a particular type of entity OR ACTIVITY.


Regards,
Luc

On 05/15/2012 04:03 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Agents are no longer a subclass of entity.
>
>
> The text currently says:
>  An agent MAY be a particular type of entity or activity.
>
>
> Instead, I am proposing that we write:
>  An agent MAY be a particular type of entity or activity.
>
>
> In other words, the proposal is that Agent and Activity are not 
> disjoint classes.
> This offers flexibility to asserters.  I don't think there has been a 
> strong case
> for making those classes disjoint.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Luc
>
>
> On 04/02/2012 10:53 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of 
>> entity [prov-dm]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/337
>>
>> Raised by: Luc Moreau
>> On product: prov-dm
>>
>> Currently, prov-dm defines agent as follows:
>>
>> An agent is a type of entity that bears some form of responsibility 
>> for an activity taking place. An agent is a particular type of 
>> Entity. This means that the model can be used to express provenance 
>> of the agents themselves.
>>
>> While it is nice to be able to express the provenance of agents, it 
>> is not obvious to me that agents should always be entities.  In fact, 
>> they could be activities.
>>
>> Consider a collaboration activity, to which several agents ag1, ag2, 
>> ..., agn are associated. Why can't we see it as an agent too?
>> activity(collaboration)
>> wasAssociatedWith(collaboration,agi,contract)
>>
>> agent(collaboration)
>> wasAttributed(nice-piece-of-work,collaboration)
>>
>>
>> So, I would propose the following alternative definition:
>>
>>
>> An agent is something that bears some form of responsibility for an 
>> activity taking place.
>>
>> A given agent may be a particular type of Entity or Activity. This 
>> means that the model can be used to express provenance of the agents 
>> themselves.
>>
>>
>> Looking at prov-o, I notice that they have already defined an agent 
>> as subclass of owl:Thing.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
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
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 15:17:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 15 May 2012 15:17:41 GMT