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

Re: Proposals to vote on related to 'event': deadline Dec 14th midnight GMT

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:52:00 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|2c717977ab6718400707f20715327110nBI8q408L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4EEEFB30.8080909@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi all,

And likewise for usage record:
See diffs at:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/404c5310b5cb

I tried to address the phrasing issue that was flagged.  Please comment 
if any problem.

I have also tried to add a few 'instantaneous' adjectives, where there 
was potential ambiguity.

Regards,
Luc

On 12/16/2011 01:55 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>
>
> Hi Stephan, all,
>
> I have updated the definition of generation-record.
> See diffs at:
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/bb06ee73f89e
>
> I tried to address your comment Stephan. If there is a problem, feel 
> free to raise an issue.
>
> Regards,
> Luc
>
> On 12/14/2011 04:56 PM, Stephan Zednik wrote:
>> 1: + 0.5 ( I am not sure about saying that the entity "did not exist" 
>> before the generation milestone, perhaps that the entity record is 
>> only accurate after the generation milestone?)
>> 2: + 1
>> 3: Use "milestone"
>>
>> -- Stephan
>>
>> On Dec 9, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Several of you, including Satya, Tim and Jim have raised various
>>> concerns about events.  Here are some proposals to tackle these
>>> concerns in prov-dm WD3. Can you express your support in the usual
>>> way, we will confirm the outcome at the next teleconference.
>>>
>>> CONTEXT:
>>>
>>> 1. The concept of event as defined in prov-dm is instantaneous. On the
>>>    other hand, other ontologies define the concept of event, e.g. LODE
>>>    [1], as not instantaneous. This causes confusion, and risks
>>>    hampering adoption.
>>>
>>> 2. The prov-dm document (WD2) is defining 'generation' in a
>>>    conflicting manner.  On the one hand, in [2], it states that
>>>    generation is an event, so is instantaneous.  On the other hand, in
>>>    [3], it states that completion of generation is the event.
>>>
>>> In a generation, what we care about is the point at which the entity
>>> becomes available for consumption by others.  Before that, it's not an
>>> entity yet (or it is not this entity being generated).  So, calling
>>> the whole of generation an event (forget the choice of word for now)
>>> is not what was intended.  The event is the point at which generation
>>> is complete.
>>>
>>> This is actually nice reflected in Olaf and Jun's provenance
>>> vocabulary [4], where they have a similar concept, called Data
>>> Creation defined as:
>>>
>>>     DataCreation is a class that represents the completed creation 
>>> of a data item.
>>>
>>>
>>> Note the choice of word *completed*.
>>>
>>> PROPOSALS:
>>>
>>>
>>> We therefore propose to change the definition of Generation [2] as
>>> follows.
>>> - With proposals 1 and 2, resolve the conflicting definitions around 
>>> generation (and use) in prov-dm.
>>> - With proposal 3, adopt another name for event.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> PROPOSAL 1. Adopt the following Definition for generation.
>>> /In PROV-DM, a generation record is a representation of a
>>> world event, the completed creation of a new entity by an
>>> activity. This entity did not exist before this event; this entity is
>>> available for usage after this event./
>>>
>>>
>>> Comment: With this, we are not saying that creation of an entity is
>>> the event, it's the completed creation that is an event.  It's also
>>> also fine, I believe, to regard this as instantaneous.  Also, if
>>> somebody wants to model the actual creation, it is also fine, they can
>>> use activities for that.
>>>
>>> For usage, we would take a similar approach. In the provenance
>>> vocabulary, they use the completed access to a data structure, but
>>> this is not right for what we want. Instead:
>>>
>>> PROPOSAL 2. Adopt the following Definition for usage.
>>> /In PROV-DM, a usage record is a representation of a world
>>> event: the start of an entity consumption by an activity. Before this
>>> event, this entity was not consumed or used in any form or shape by
>>> the activity, totally or partially.
>>> /
>>> Comment: These definitions are now exactly in line with those in [3].
>>>
>>>
>>> /PROPOSAL 3. Replace the word event by action./
>>>
>>> Comment: So, prov-dm would define four actions: entity
>>> generation/entity usage/activity start/activity end, which are all
>>> instantaneous.  These actions would have "effects" on the system in
>>> the sense that they change the entities and activities it contains.
>>>
>>> Assuming proposal 3 is adopted, obviously, the text of proposals 1 and
>>> 2 would use the word 'action'.
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you express your support, or counter-proposals, by Wednesday 
>>> midnight GMT.
>>> Assuming there is support, we would incorporate all these changes 
>>> before XMas.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>> Luc
>>>
>>> [1] http://linkedevents.org/ontology/
>>> [2] 
>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#dfn-Generation
>>> [3] 
>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#types-of-events
>>> [4] 
>>> http://trdf.sourceforge.net/provenance/ns.html#sec-DataCreationClasses
>>>
>>
>
> -- 
> 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 Monday, 19 December 2011 08:55:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:05 UTC