- From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:50:16 +0000
- To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Cc: Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:25, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote: > Personally, I'm in favor of being more liberal here in terms of including > constructs. Primarily because our purpose is interchange and having some > what can be considered domain specific constructs will greatly help in > facilitating provenance interchange. This is especially the case for common > cases. I agree that we should provide some general, yet domain-specific constructs, as they would encourage provenance exchange that is more valuable and specific than just "something used something else and made something new". However I don't think these should be influencing the "core" model or required for someone to say they are "PROV enabled". Also I believe such domain-specific constructs should be informed by actual needs from those domains, and not just made up on the fly, which is the feeling I get from some of the current "Common relations" constructs like wasSummaryOf. (What about wasIllustrationIn? discussed? disagreedWith?) So while I'm OK with having a semi-general relation like "wasRevisionOf" - these should be kept separate in some kind of "publication"-centric extension, as it would probably not be useful for instance to describe biological processes or where my coffee beans came from. The more domain-specific constraints we add, the more likely is we get them wrong, in particular if we are not domain experts. For instance, I work with scientific workflows, and could help with making an extension for provenance of workflows, but I would need help from many other workflow experts as well to be able to form something that is generally useful amongst most workflow systems, but such a task could then easily become overwhelming and worthy its own committees. (I think it should be a sign of success for PROV if we see such committees and approaches starting up!) -- Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team School of Computer Science The University of Manchester
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 15:51:11 UTC