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

Re: provenance of provenance

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 13:46:28 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|d612c20a56cbf945b39352838346af0eo4HDkU08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4FB644A4.3040504@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Khalid,

Comments below

On 05/17/2012 10:54 AM, Khalid Belhajjame wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Here is what I think:
>
> +1 for dropping 'account'
> +1 for introducing 'bundle' (bundle has a weaker semantics than 
> account, which I like, the definition of bundle needs to be slightly 
> modified as indicated below)
> +1 for dropping hasAnnotation and Note
> +1 for adding the component on bundles
>
> Regarding the section on bundle in 
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd6-bundle.html:
>
> - The definition of bundle states that "A bundle is a named set of 
> provenance descriptions, and is itself an entity, so allowing 
> provenance of provenance to be expressed.". I don't think a bundle is 
> necessarily an entity. A bundle becomes an entity only when somebody 
> decides to describe its provenance. This applies to anything, not just 
> bundles. Therefore, I would suggest reformulating the definition to 
> something in the lines of "A bundle is a named set of provenance 
> descriptions.". If there is a need, then more details specifying that 
> a bundle is an entity when its provenance is described can be 
> elaborated when presenting the example specifying the provenance of 
> the bundle created by Alice.
>
There is a precedent for this. We said a Plan is an entity.  We said a 
Collection is an entity. Why not a bundle?
> - I think that the description of the provenance locator construct is 
> outside the scope of the data model. If the group feels that there is 
> a need for having such a construct, then I think that it will be more 
> appropriate to try to adapt it and include it within the PAQ document.
>

My PASOA experience is that we need to make such assertions for 
provenance to be incrementally browseable.
The relation also provides a notion of alternate.
For these reasons, I feel it belongs to the data model and ontology.

> Typo: in the definition of provenance location: relatation -> relation
>
> Thanks, khalid
>
>

Thanks,
Luc
>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk 
>> <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     Dear all,
>>
>>     We are seeking feedback on text regarding bundles (allowing
>>     provenance
>>     of provenance to be expressed).
>>
>>     http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd6-bundle.html
>>
>>     It is addressing ISSUES-257, ISSUE-260, ISSUE-88, ISSUE-297.
>>     We will respond to these issues individually, shortly.
>>
>>     Cheers,
>>     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
Received on Friday, 18 May 2012 12:47:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 18 May 2012 12:47:10 GMT