- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 10:14:57 +0100
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- CC: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, public-prov-wg@w3.org
Stian, Your comment raises a question of scope... Until now, the general assumption has been that provenance is about things which have happened (hence the past tense/time debates), rather than what *should* have happened. I think the key point is that there is no conditionallity about provenance. What you raise, I think, is a use of provenance as part of establishing blame rather than trust. I think this is a separate issue that (for the time being at least) we should not dig into. #g -- Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 06:28, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > >> Reiterating a previous comment I made, can an Agent be defined independently >> of process execution? > > There might be agents who DIDN'T initiate/control a process when > perhaps they should have. I'm not sure how that could be captured in > provenance - perhaps they were involved in the overall process. > > In terms of example, imagine the journalist example > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceExample: > > * analyst (alice) downloads a turtle serialization (lcp1) of the > resource (r1) from government portal > * analyst (alice) generates a chart (c1) from the turtle (lcp1) using > some software (tools1) with statistical assumptions (stats1 > > Alice the Analyst agent does however *not* control or initiate a > process for Verifying the conversion data (d1) to RDF (f1). She does > not even look at the raw data d1 (perhaps it's not been published in > raw format). > > If that had been in the original provenance trail then Bob the Blogger > might more easily conclude that the re-published data has been > tampered with to deal with the news story, and that the government's > argument about "something went wrong going to RDF" could be a > cover-up. > > > A question is if Ed the Editor should have spotted this - how was he > involved in reviewing the story and Alice's acting as an agent before > it was published? He is the missing agent. (This sounds like a poor > movie plot line) >
Received on Friday, 24 June 2011 10:53:14 UTC