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: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:43:16 +0100
Message-ID: <50655514.60004@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Luc,

This comparison doesn't work for me.

The aspect of a relationship is inherent in the term "communication" (cf. "by 
two activities"), but such is not present in the bare phrase "primary source".

Hence it's possible to get away without saying explicitly "relationship" with 
regard to communication.

Similarly for "derivation".

#g
--

On 27/09/2012 23:45, Luc Moreau wrote:
>
> Hi Stephan:
>
> Look at the two following definitions (others are similar)
>
> Communication ◊ is the exchange of some unspecified entity by two activities,
> one activity using some entity generated by the other.
> A derivation ◊ is a transformation of an entity into another, an update of an
> entity resulting in a new one, or the construction of a new entity based on a
> pre-existing entity.
>
> They don't state "communication is a relation ..." or "The derivation relation
> is ...".
>
> That's what I wanted to avoid in the definition of primary source you suggested.
>
> Luc
>
> On 27/09/12 23:42, Stephan Zednik wrote:
>> Luc,
>>
>> I am not sure I follow you here. What is your distinction between a concept
>> and a relation in the data model?
>>
>> As for Graham's proposed definition, I do not like the dual usage of 'primary
>> source' as both a relation and the thing being related to.
>>
>> Like Graham I like the inclusion of the term 'relation' because I do not want
>> to introduce confusion regarding whether primary source is a specialization of
>> entity, but I would recommend we drop the second usage of primary source where
>> it appears to be mentioned as a noun.
>>
>> [[
>> A primary source relation indicates a derivation from an entity that records
>> direct contemporaneous experience or knowledge about its topic, without the
>> revisionary perspective of hindsight.
>> ]]
>>
>> --Stephan
>>
>> On Sep 27, 2012, at 4:15 PM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> but this definition would not be aligned with the other, since we define the
>>> concept as opposed to the relation in a data model.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27/09/12 22:15, Graham Klyne wrote:
>>>> Well, for starters, there's Stephan's original. I wouldn't drop "relation"
>>>> here. Since you ask, here's my cut:
>>>>
>>>> [[
>>>> A primary source relation indicates a derivation from a primary source. I.e.
>>>> from an entity that records direct contemporaneous experience or knowledge
>>>> about its topic, without the revisionary perspective of hindsight.
>>>> ]]
>>>>
>>>> #g
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 27/09/2012 19:26, Luc Moreau wrote:
>>>>> Hi graham,
>>>>> Can you make a concrete suggestion?
>>>>>
>>>>> Professor Luc Moreau
>>>>> Electronics and Computer Science
>>>>> University of Southampton
>>>>> Southampton SO17 1BJ
>>>>> United Kingdom
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 Sep 2012, at 16:27, "Graham Klyne"<GK@ninebynine.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I find this revision of Stephan's phrasing to be confusing, even
>>>>>> contradictory. "a primary source is a derivation" seems a bit oxymoronic
>>>>>> to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #g
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 25/09/2012 17:57, Luc Moreau 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:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Aprimary 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
>>>>>>>>> United Kingdomhttp://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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Received on Friday, 28 September 2012 07:43:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 28 September 2012 07:44:06 GMT