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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-519: Data Model Figure 8 [prov-dm]

From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:10:46 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|3fac15f0b76ec66ae8b133152a5eff98o8PEAl08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|5062FED6.4040102@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org

Dear all,

Both ISSUE-519 and ISSUE-523 relate to Influence.  I drafted a response, 
outlining some changes
to be made to prov-dm.

I would like the group to make a resolution at the teleconference on 
Thursday, before implementing the changes.

Best regards,
Luc

PS. Wiki: 
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-519_and_ISSUE-523_.28Influence_Inheritance.29


      ISSUE-519 and ISSUE-523 (Influence Inheritance)

    * Original email:
      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0109.html
    * Original email:
      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0113.html
    * Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/519
    * Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/523
    * Group Response:
          o First, a reminder that UML diagrams are informative.
          o The prov-constraints document provides normative information
            about Influence. See Inference 15.
          o For instance, the following inference is permitted, allowing
            to infer a wasInfluencedBy statement from a wasGeneratedBy
            statement.

IF wasGeneratedBy(id; e,a,_t,attrs) THEN wasInfluencedBy(id; e, a, attrs).

    *
          o Whatever appears as id/attributes in wasGeneratedBy becomes
            also id/attributes in wasInfluencedBy
          o Whatever appears as entity (e) in wasGeneratedBy becomes
            influencee in wasInfluencedBy
          o Whatever appears as activity (a) in wasGeneratedBy becomes
            influencer in wasInfluencedBy
          o Given this, prov-dm should define the minimalist
            characteristics for wasInfluencedBy in a technology agnostic
            way.
          o Inheritance is a way of implementing Inference 15 of
            prov-constraints (and this approach was successfully
            followed by prov-o), but it does not have to be implemented
            that way. For instance, a rule based system could simply
            implement Inference 15 without requiring inheritance. The
            current prov-xml schema does not define WasGeneratedBy as an
            extension if Influence. A record based system may not rely
            on inheritance.
          o As the author suggests, inheritance would imply that
            attributes are inherited by the children relation. It is not
            the case that wasGeneratedBy has influencer/influencee
            attributes, but instead, we want to show that they
            correspond to activity/entity in that case.
          o Given this, the Working Group has decided that:
                + The UML diagram in Figure 8 should not show a
                  Generalization association between WasGeneratedBy (and
                  others) and WasInfluencedBy.
                + A table should be introduced showing which attributes
                  in Generation/Usage/etc are influencer or influencee.
          o With these changes, the issue raised by the author is no
            longer applicable: it is no longer the case that
            wasGeneratedBy etc can be used anywhere between
            agent/activity/entity.
          o For the comment "The notion of influence is useful for the
            PROV model, but it is unclear whether this is intended to
            represent an extension point for adopters of the spec. How
            should it be implemented?", we have shown with prov-o,
            prov-n, and prov-xml various ways of implementing Influence.
            According to Section 6, Influence is not seen as an
            extensibility point of the model, instead, it is seen as a
            means to express influence in PROV without being specific
            about its nature. We note the following, quoted from the
            specification:
                + It is recommended to adopt these more specific
                  relations when writing provenance descriptions. It is
                  anticipated that the Influence relation may be useful
                  to express queries over provenance information.
    * References:
          o Inference 15:
            http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-constraints-20120911/#influence-inference
          o Current xml schema:
            http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/f0e8bc2ae457/xml/schema/prov.xsd
          o Extensibility section:
            http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#extensibility-section
    * Proposed changes: TODO when vote
    * Original author's acknowledgement:


    [edit
    <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/index.php?title=ResponsesToPublicComments&action=edit&section=39>]



On 10/09/2012 09:47, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-519: Data Model Figure 8   [prov-dm]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/519
>
> Raised by: Luc Moreau
> On product: prov-dm
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Figure_8
>
> ISSUE-463
>
> The figure incorrectly indicates that any child association can be used between and among the entity, activity, and agent classes. It would be more accurate to remove the labels from the solid associations and use the dashed lines to trace each relationship to its associated child association rather than to the parent class.
>
>
>
>
>    

-- 
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 Wednesday, 26 September 2012 13:11:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 26 September 2012 13:11:18 GMT