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

Re: Primary Source again (Re: PROV-ISSUE-518: Data Model Section 5.2.4 ) [prov-dm]

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:29:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJCyKRoVk5iGM2O2zf5D6x3Q9pWD1AgAq0LykwPakHgGMNDEZw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
I like it.

Paul

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> All,
> Here is a proposed answer to this issue. When Tim confirms he is OK, I will
> implement it.
> Comments, feedback?
> regards,
> Luc
>
> ISSUE-518 (PrimarySource)
>
> Original email:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0108.html
> Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/518
> Group Response
>
> Following the author's suggestion the Working group proposes to revise the
> definition of Primary Source as follows:
>
> A primary source is a derivation from an entity that was produced by some
> agent with direct experience and knowledge about the entity's conceptual
> topic, at the time of the topic's study, without benefit of hindsight.
>
> We also propose to add the following comment, inspired by this issue:
>
> It is also important to note that a given entity might be a primary source
> for one entity but not another. It the reason why Primary Source is defined
> as a relation as opposed to a subtype of Entity.
>
> References:
> Changes to the document:
> Original author's acknowledgement:
>
>
>
> On 25/09/2012 19:25, Paul Groth wrote:
>
> I'm fine with it.
>
> An interesting note in your response, is that we use a relation and
> not a subtype because of the "context" issue that was brought up.
>
> cheers
> Paul
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
> Would be nice if Paul and Tim could confirm they are fine.
>
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science
> University of Southampton
> Southampton SO17 1BJ
> United Kingdom
>
>
> On 25 Sep 2012, at 18:01, "Stephan Zednik"
> <zednis@rpi.edu<mailto:zednis@rpi.edu>> wrote:
>
> That reads ok to me.
>
> --Stephan
>
> On Sep 25, 2012, at 10:57 AM, Luc Moreau
> <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
> HI Stephan,
>
> I would just drop "relation" (because we define the concept) and
> "represents":
>
> A primary source is a derivation from an entity that was produced by some
> agent with direct experience and knowledge about the entity's conceptual
> topic, at the time of the topic's study, without benefit of hindsight.
>
> Luc
>
> On 09/25/2012 05:48 PM, Stephan Zednik wrote:
> How is this?
>
> A primary source relation represents a derivation from an entity that was
> produced by some agent with direct experience and knowledge about the
> entity's conceptual topic, at the time of the topic's study, without benefit
> of hindsight.
>
> --Stephan
>
> On Sep 25, 2012, at 3:41 AM, Luc Moreau
> <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk<mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> How do we address this issue?
> The current definition is:
>
> A primary source ◊<http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#concept-primary-source> for
> a topic refers to something produced by some agent with direct experience
> and knowledge about the topic, at the time of the topic's study, without
> benefit from hindsight.
>
> I wonder whether the wording 'refers to' is suitable here. We don't mean
> 'is', but 'a derivation from'. Would this address the concern?
>
> Luc
>
>
> On 10/09/2012 09:46, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>
> PROV-ISSUE-518: Data Model Section 5.2.4   [prov-dm]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/518
>
> Raised by: Luc Moreau
> On product: prov-dm
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Section_5.2.4
>
> ISSUE-463
>
> The definition of a "primary source" implies that it is an entity when in
> fact the term qualifies the role that a given entity plays during the
> creation of a new entity, not the derivation itself. This might seem to be a
> minor point, but it is clearly different from both revision and quotation,
> both of which could be used when deriving a new entity from an entity used
> as a primary source.
>
> It is also important to note that a given entity might be a primary source
> for one entity but not another ("primary source" is context-dependent).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
> United Kingdom
> http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm<http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/%7Elavm>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
> United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
--
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
- Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group |
  Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
- The Network Institute
VU University Amsterdam
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2012 13:30:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 26 September 2012 13:30:22 GMT