from July 2011 by subject

[Spam:***** SpamScore] Re: simon:entity (or Identifiable)

Access control for "Implementation Stakeholder Questionnaire Response Report"

Access plan for next 3 months

Agent Sub-Types

Agent terminology

Agent terminology (was: PROV-ISSUE-4: agent subtypes?)

Apologies for not attending tomorrow's meeting...

assertion language

blimey! is it just me or someone just kicked the W3C mail server?

Blog post on F2F

Bobs, IVP and time intervals

change in my email

Closed Actions

Connection Task Force Informal Report Outline

Connection to semantic news group

Consolidated Concepts page

data transformations named by Ontology for Biomedical Investigations

Dietary Requirements for Lunch at Meeting Next Week

f2f1 whiteboard image

Formal semantics notes

Fwd: Fwd: Discontinuing UK and FR dial-in numbers for Zakim

Homework for Connection Task Force and Interested Parties!

Identity and a thing

Implementation Stakeholder questionnaire approval

implementation task force plan and telco

Implementation TF F2F1 Presentation

Introduction + Comments on Concepts

irc handle

irc/zakim nick name

ISSUE-22: We lose which entity was used to generate which entity.

ISSUE-23: Create definition of involve to replace Use

ISSUE-24: Semantic document address "P and things used by P determine values of some of X's invariant properties (less strict)"

ISSUE-25: Semantics group to incorporate ""derivation" or "partially determined by" relationship could be subjective or context-dependent assertion, not an objectively true or false statement." Derivation issue # 2

ISSUE-27: Consider ordering of event in model and semantics

ISSUE-28: We need a mechanism to assert two entity states refer to the same entity

IVPof proposal (was Re: Models and their use)

long list of actions

Meeting Minutes 2011-06-30

Meeting Minutes 2011-07-21

Models and their use

OECD Paper

PAQ draft in W3C repository

Planning page for generating the 2nd iteration of the Implementation Stakeholder questionnaire

Proposed changes to Process Execution and related concepts

Prov WG F2F Agenda 6-7 July 2011

Prov WG Telecon Agenda 14 July 2011

Prov WG Telecon Agenda 21 July 2011

Prov WG Telecon Agenda 28 July 2011

PROV-ISSUE-26 (uses and generates questions): How can one figure out the provenance of a given entity?

PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-30 (name-for-bob): What name do we use for the BOB construct? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-31 (standard-names): what names do we use to refer to the language, ontology, and access/query methods [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-32: Bob definition [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-33: Section 3.1 and Section 3.2: example of IVPof [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-34: Section 4: definition of "Agent"

PROV-ISSUE-35: Section 4: How one would know that two BOBs are characterizations of the same entity? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-36: Section 3.2: Accessing the provenance of HTML documents [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-37: Section 3.3 and Section 3.4: on provenance information specified by third-parties [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-38: Section 3.4: Third party services are SPARQL endpoints [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-39 (generation-identifiable-activity): Generation should be defined as an identifable activity [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-40 (recommended-roles): Roles should not be SHOULD and not MUST [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-41 (distinct-roles): Distinct roles should be SHOULD and not MUST [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-42 (derivation-agent): Derivation should specifically mention agent in its definition [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-43 (derivation-time): Deriviation should have associated time [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-44 (shortcuts): Introduce widely used provenance concepts as shortcuts in the model [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-45: isDerivedFrom and IVPof are transitive. [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-46 (where-is-D-in-provenance): Where do I find document D in provenance [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-47 (third-party-provenance): How to obtain provenance from a third party known by the user [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-48 (Provenance Concept: Revision): Revision should be a class and not a property [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-49 (Participation): Suggested definition for Participation [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-4: agent subtypes?

PROV-ISSUE-4: Defining Agent using FOAF's definition

PROV-ISSUE-50 (Ordering of Process): Defintion for Ordering of Process [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-51 (asserter-def): Asserter needs to be defined with respect to a provenance container/account [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-52 (provenance-source-equal-treatment): why handling provider and third parties differently? [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-53 (sparql-query-is-overkill): can't we have a lighter method to retrieve provenance-uri, given a document uri? [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-54 (which-provenance-is-expected-to-be-retrieved?): What is it we expect to obtain when we say "retrieving the provenance of something" [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-55 (are-provenance-uris-needed): Are provenance URIs really needed [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-56 (derivation-definition-does-not-imply-transitivity): Derivation as defined is not transitive [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-57 (comment-on-ivp-of): comment on ivp of

PROV-ISSUE-58 (time-iso8601): is reference to iso8601 appropriate? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-59 (generation-definition): on generation [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-60: comments on bob [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-61 (is-revision-necessary): is revision necessary? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-62 (about-prov-language): about provenance language [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-63 (about the example): about the example [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-64 (definition-use): definition of use [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-65 (domain-specific-info): How is domain specific data combined with the generic model [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-66 (is-execution-a-bob): Why is process execution not defined as a characterised entity? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-67 (single-execution): Why is there a difference in what is represented by one vs multiple executions? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-7: trying to reach consensus on derivation (deadline: Wednesday midnight GMT)

prov-wg mercurial error

Provenance Access Query example

Provenance Model (ontology and formal model documentation)

Provenance Model draft document

Regarding the definition of IVP OF


relation <--> property

resolution about pil:Entity/pil:BOB

Review of provenance model draft

simon:entity (or Identifiable)


Simplicity (was: Regarding the definition of IVP OF)

Status of Plan for Report on Results of Implementation Stakeholders Questionnaire

Task forces - brief presentations

the nature of a bob (was Re: Models and their use)

W3C Privacy Interest Group

who is who?

Last message date: Sunday, 31 July 2011 16:07:50 UTC