W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > December 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-182 (TLebo): stronger name for "wasAssociatedWith" [prov-dm]

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:38:44 +0100
Message-ID: <4EE0F624.2050605@vu.nl>
To: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi All,

There are two kinds of records between activity and Agent:

wasAssociatedWith is there to capture some associate between an agent 
and an activity.

Whereas there's actedOnBehalf of to describe something with some more 
light weight notion of responsibility.

cheers,
Paul

Stephan Zednik wrote:
> On Dec 8, 2011, at 9:08 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>
>> Since "responsibility" is the distinguishing notion in agency (according to Yolanda's proposal), I think that "responsibility" should be included in the name of the relation.
>>
>> A possible counter proposal for "wasAssociatedBy":
>>
>>      hadResponsibilityFor
>>
>> Jim Myers suggested "bearsResponsibilityFor".
>
> +1
>
> --Stephan
>
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2011, at 8:04 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>
>>> PROV-ISSUE-182 (TLebo): stronger name for "wasAssociatedWith" [prov-dm]
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/182
>>>
>>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>>> On product: prov-dm
>>>
>>> There was a reasonable support for renaming "wasAssociatedWith" to something with "a bit more meaning" that has not been reflected in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#dfn-activity-association
>>>
>>> The thread started at http://www.w3.org/mid/CDFD3D2D-6354-4618-BB05-B541B84DC5EB@ISI.EDU
>>>
>>> Jim Myers suggested "bearsResponsbilityFor" at http://www.w3.org/mid/3131E7DF4CD2D94287870F5A931EFC230299C0F8@EX14MB2.win.rpi.edu
>>>
>>> Stephan Zednick suggests that "wasAssociatedWith" was too generic, by asking how it differed from "hadParticipation" in http://www.w3.org/mid/79C82866-807A-4FE0-8F60-90F7CAD955B0@rpi.edu and further argues for its weakness at http://www.w3.org/mid/4662AC25-B5A6-485D-9A7E-5180558AF724@rpi.edu
>>>
>>> I agree but didn't send anything to the list.
>>>
>>> Luc said we can raise issues against it (now?) http://www.w3.org/mid/EMEW3|f3b02401dcbcf60c395672bf886e967fnAKKN808L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|446DD0D9-0A95-4307-A7CB-43B55111CF83@ecs.soton.ac.uk
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2011 17:41:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:04 UTC