RE: simon:entity (or Identifiable)

> 
> Being able to describe what the entity "looks like" at the time the
> provenance was recorded.
> 
> My understanding was that a BOB was something like a named graph,
graph
> literal (http://webr3.org/blog/semantic-web/rdf-named-graphs-vs-graph-
> literals/),
> or information artifact similar to iao:Dataset. The Bob would then
have
> content that described, in some way, the entity in question.
> Hence the Bob being a description of an entity's state.

Do you distinguish 'description of an entity' from 'description of an
entity's state'? I get the sense that you are not using state in the
same sense of 'a more stateful view of' that is driving the discussion
of entity versus entity-state in the IVPof debates.

> 
> If it is possible to know, there should be assertions on the BOB
itself that say
> which entity the BOB is describing. Ideally, this is a URI of
something that's
> referenced within the BOB.

I'm hoping someone will chime in on this - I agree we need to connect
the idea of a bob with the entity, but I could see implementing that as
a link (as you say) or by saying that my entity's class is a subtype of
Bob (hence there's only one URL for the Bob and the entity). I don't
understand how best to make the point that we need to be able to
navigate to/from the out-of-band/out-of-model entity given a Bob without
pre-supposing how that might be implemented in terms of linking vs.
subclassing. Hopefully someone can. (This is the same question I was
asking about Simon's point that dc:agent could be  a person. To find
things with dc:agents that have blue eyes, you need to interpret the
agent as a person and check eye color which means going outside the dc
model (which I'm assuming either defines agent and not person, or at
least does not define person as having an eye color). How is that
situation talked about at the model level and dealt with in
implementations?)

 Jim

Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 16:08:13 UTC