Re: PROV-ISSUE-1 (define-resource): Definition for concept 'Resource' [Provenance Terminology]

Luc Moreau wrote:
> Dear all,
> I am pleased to see that some definitions are being uploaded on the 
> wiki; in particular, I see definitions of resources, which I would
> like to begin debating during the teleconference this week.
> For now, I just use this definition:
>  A resource can be anything that might be identified by URI
> Going back to the Data Journalism example [1], it is not entirely clear
> that such a notion of resource encapsulates all the "data entities" that
> we find here.    I can see r1 and r2 being resources.
> However, what about f1, which, for instance, could have been generated
> by an xslt transform over d1. f1 could be a file on the local file 
> system, which then
> is made available later as a resource r1.
> Likewise, lcp1 is a local copy of a serialization of r1.  Again, lcp1 
> could be a file
> on the file system.
> Are lcp1 and f1 resources?

 > [1]

My default answers would be "Yes" and "Yes", in that they might indeed be 
identified by URIs, even if they are not generally accessible using those URIs 
(e.g. lcp1 being a local copy).

Less clear to me, looking at the example, is whether f1 ("published RDF data") 
is the same as r1 ("rdf data available as a web resource").  Reading the 
description, I would be inclined to say that are the same resource, but I can 
see some scope for differing interpretations depending on the intent here.

> Can we classify all the "data entities" in group, with same properties?
> What are these classes?

Do you mean formally classify in an ontological sense, or informally as in 
indicating the intent and differences between the labelled entities?  The latter 
might be illuminating, but I sense the possibility of a tar pit here if we push 
too hard.

The AWWW discusses a subclass of resources called "information resources", but 
this distinction isn't universally appreciated.  It has been used as part of the 
long-running "http-range-14" discussion [2].  I think this distinction, in some 
form, might be relevant to the example.



Received on Tuesday, 24 May 2011 09:43:06 UTC