- From: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:07:36 +0100
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On 25/07/2011 10:24, Luc Moreau wrote: > > The problem with Snapshot (like state, etc), is that it is the > snapshot of an entity. > We just don't want to distinguish an entity from its state, or an > entity from its snapshot. On the other hand, Snapshot has the advantage of conveying the fact that it is a description from a certain perspective (view). khalid > > Hence, using Entity avoids this problem. > > Luc > > On 07/25/2011 10:19 AM, Paul Groth wrote: >> I thought we were getting somewhere with snapshot..... >> >> I don't think ENTITY really captures the intuition behind a BOB. It's >> too general. >> >> thanks, >> Paul >> >> Luc Moreau wrote: >>> The word 'Entity' should also be considered for the construct BOB. >>> >>> If we do so, the text 'characterized entity' should be replaced by >>> something else in the draft specification. >>> Why not 'thing'? >>> >>> >>> So, the text could become: >>> >>> Section 4. >>> In the world (whether real or not), there are things, which can be >>> physical, digital, conceptual, or otherwise, and activities involving >>> things. >>> Words such as thing or activity should be understood with their >>> informal meaning. >>> This specification is concerned with characterized things, that is, >>> things and their situation in the world, as perceived by the asserter. >>> >>> Section 5.1 >>> An ENTITY represents an identifiable characterized thing. >>> >>> >>> Luc >>> >>> On 07/24/2011 11:43 PM, Reza B'Far wrote: >>>> First, for the record Khalid was the person suggesting Snapshot :) >>>> >>>> The way I've seen snapshot used commercially, it's fairly consistent >>>> with the current definition of BOB. There is some murkiness on both >>>> sides (how "snapshot" is used commercially and I think we're still >>>> iterating here on the definition of BOB, but may be that's close to be >>>> finalized). However, I think they are close enough. What I liked >>>> about "Snapshot" is that its intuitive and is used in several domains >>>> that I know of (content management, legal, configuration systems, and >>>> I've also seen use-cases in microfilm production by old-school >>>> librarians). Also, I think "Snapshot" offers a huge advantage that >>>> it's neither explicitly linked to the entity nor its state. And I >>>> know the distinction between entity vs. entity's state and how that's >>>> articulated has been in a lot of the discussions. Using "Snapshot" >>>> sort of obsoletes that discussion. >>>> >>>> On 7/24/11 12:57 PM, Stephan Zednik wrote: >>>>> I am not partial to snapshot, partially because of the extensive >>>>> functional usage of the term. I have always associated a snapshot >>>>> with a point in time, not a duration - but this may be an incorrect >>>>> association. >>>>> >>>>> I am open to discussing it, but my initial inclination was negative >>>>> towards it. >>>>> >>>>> Will we use the same definition as we have been using for BOB? >>>>> >>>>> --Stephan >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 24, 2011, at 9:52 AM, "Reza B'Far"<reza.bfar@oracle.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I second the term "Snapshot". This term also has functional usage >>>>>> in several commercial application categories used within roughly the >>>>>> same meaning. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 7/24/11 3:45 AM, Khalid Belhajjame wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Stephan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Given the example you gave in your previous email, I think that >>>>>>> "EntitySpanshot" or "Snapshot" should be fine, given that it >>>>>>> reflect the fact that it is a description of an entity that holds >>>>>>> for some period of time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you agree? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> khalid >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 23/07/2011 20:24, Stephan Zednik wrote: >>>>>>>> I do not feel that EntityInstance, EntityInstantiation, or >>>>>>>> InstantiatedEntity make sense for the book ownership scenario, or >>>>>>>> any scenario modeling the provenance of changes in characteristics >>>>>>>> of a physical object. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To reiterate the example since I haven't committed it to a wiki >>>>>>>> page yet. Book X is an entity that represents a real world >>>>>>>> object. It can be put on a shelf, loaned to friends, damaged, >>>>>>>> and/or destroyed. It has important characteristics (condition, >>>>>>>> ownership, location, etc) that may change over the life of the >>>>>>>> book. We may want to represent the provenance of the book as a >>>>>>>> chain of ownership. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> |<----------------------------------------------------- Book X >>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------->| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> |<!------ Book X with owner A ---->|<----Book X with owner B >>>>>>>> ---->|<---- Book X with owner A --------->| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If a book changes ownership, is the "book with changed ownership" >>>>>>>> a different EntityInstance? A different InstantiatedEntity? I >>>>>>>> don't think what we current call a BOB is an 'instance of' >>>>>>>> anything. I think of it as a description of an entity that holds >>>>>>>> for some time period (not necessarily given) for which >>>>>>>> contextually important mutable characteristics of the the entity >>>>>>>> are held to be known. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --Stephan >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 7/22/2011 5:29 AM, Curt Tilmes wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 07/22/2011 03:43 AM, Khalid Belhajjame wrote: >>>>>>>>>> The term "Snapshot" was suggested some time ago, and it seems >>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> several people did like it. >>>>>>>>>> We can also use the term "EntitySnapshot". >>>>>>>>> Following from snapshot: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> EntityInstance >>>>>>>>> EntityInstantiation >>>>>>>>> InstantiatedEntity >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Curt >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >> >
Received on Monday, 25 July 2011 10:08:11 UTC