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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-530: Data Model Section 5.7.2 (Table 6) [prov-dm]

From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:56:44 +0100
Message-ID: <5061B81C.805@ncl.ac.uk>
CC: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Hi,

I wouldn't be so quickly dismissive of this comment. Given that we have a "loose" semantics for attributes, I find it hard to argue 
for or against using those same attributes in unanticipated ways.
I am wary of this comment:  "these restrictions could be circumvented using user-defined optional attributes if needed, at the 
expense of maintaining a single standard representation for the information".
This is the interop argument again -- the possibility that we see new attributes defined to mimick existing ones but with a 
different namespace and in a different context.
   So I would like to hear more comments from the group on this.

As a minor point, I don't think this is a good argument to mention:
"No other external comments made a request for allowing such attributes in more concepts."
I believe the merit of comments should not be based by their popularity amongs the public...

--Paolo



  On 9/24/12 7:46 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Find a proposed response for this in the wiki at:
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-530_.28attributes.29
> For convenience, it is copied below.
> Comments, feedback?
> Best regards,
> Luc
>
>
>       ISSUE-530 (attributes)
>
>   * Original email:http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0120.html
>   * Tracker:http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/530
>   * Group Response
>       o The group has given careful considerations to attributes in prov-dm, specifically time, location and role.
>       o The group could not reach consensus to allow these attributes to more concepts of the data model.
>       o No other external comments made a request for allowing such attributes in more concepts.
>       o Role:
>           + We have already elaborated on roles in our response to ISSUE-532
>       o Location:
>           + While a notion of location is fairly intuitive for an activity or entity, it is less intuitive for associations for
>             instance. In an association, the activity may have a location, and the agent may have a location. It is however
>             unclear what the location of the association itself may be.
>       o Time:
>           + The same comments apply for time. However, in this case, the constraints document explains what kind of ordering
>             constraints exist, between an agent and activity, for instance.
>   * So overall, the group could not find consensus to broaden these attributes to other relations in a meaningful manner. Given
>     implementation, using the PROV extension mechanism, are however able to add similar attributes for their specific needs.
>   * References:
>       o Roles:http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-532_.28Role.29
>       o Resolution on roles:http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-06-07#resolution_2
>       o Time constraints:http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0120.html
>   * Proposed changes:none
>   * Original author's acknowledgement:
>
>
>
>
> On 10/09/12 09:54, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> PROV-ISSUE-530: Data Model Section 5.7.2 (Table 6)   [prov-dm]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/530
>>
>> Raised by: Luc Moreau
>> On product: prov-dm
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Section_5.7.2_.28Table_6.29
>>
>> ISSUE-463
>>
>> The restrictions on when time, location and role can be used should be reviewed after the public feedback period closes and changes are made to the model. In particular, I think there is justification for allowing other relationships, such as Association and Delegation, to take these attributes. The model would be more flexible without these restrictions (which could be circumvented using user-defined optional attributes if needed, at the expense of maintaining a single standard representation for the information).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> 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 Kingdomhttp://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
>


-- 
-----------  ~oo~  --------------
Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK
http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2012 14:06:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 25 September 2012 14:06:43 GMT