- From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 20:33:51 +0100
- To: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
- CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|64268e90a84bde13bfc83c79a25cb6dbn6KKXv08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4E287F1F>
Hi Khalid, OK. This said we have over 20 occurrences of "characterized entity" in the text. We can't simply use the "expansion" everywhere. Having some terminology is desirable. Do you have a suggestion? We could also go for a typographic difference: BOB -> CharacterizedEntity and we keep 'characterized entity' elsewhere. Luc On 21/07/2011 20:27, Khalid Belhajjame wrote: > > Hi Luc, > > I guess I used the wrong term, "interchangeable". I guess that what I > meant is that "Characterized Entity" can be considered as a candidate > to replace "BOB". Of course, in that case, we will need to avoid the > usage of the the term "characterized entity" in the core of the > definition. E.g., we can use the following definition: > > A "Characterized Entity" is a description of the situation of an > entity in the world. > > Or something in these lines. > > Thanks, khalid > > On 21/07/2011 19:54, Luc Moreau wrote: >> Hi Khalid, >> >> As far as I know, they are *not* interchangeable. One is the language >> construct, the other is "in the world". >> >> cf. definition: >> >> A BOB represents an identifiable >> characterized entity. >> >> Should we go for "Characterized Entity", we need a typographic >> convention to distinguish between >> >> the construct and the world-thing, otherwise, the reader will never >> know whether this is language construct >> >> or not. >> >> >> Luc >> >> On 21/07/2011 19:45, Khalid Belhajjame wrote: >>> >>> In the Provenance Model initial draft, the terms "Bob" and >>> "characterized entity" are used interchangeably. >>> Characterized entity seems then to be a candidate for replacing BOB. >>> >>> Thanks, khalid >>> >>> On 21/07/2011 19:30, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >>>> PROV-ISSUE-30 (name-for-bob): What name do we use for the BOB construct? [Conceptual Model] >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/30 >>>> >>>> Raised by: Luc Moreau >>>> On product: Conceptual Model >>>> >>>> How do we call the construct referred to as BOB. "BOB" was introduced as a placeholder at F2F1. Before F2F1, we use to refer to it as thing. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >
Received on Thursday, 21 July 2011 19:34:25 UTC