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

Hi Jun,

On 05/25/2011 11:47 AM, Jun Zhao wrote:
> Hi Luc,
> On 25/05/2011 08:45, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> If this is the reading, then I think we should aim to be clearer in our
>> own definition.
> That's partially the reason I raised the question last night. I am not 
> convinced that the phrase "identified by URIs" is giving anything 
> meaningful to the definition of Resource. It just appears to add some 
> unnecessary constraints.

That's your comment that really made me realise this.

Isn't it the case that in OPMV you can talk about a process p2 using  an 
artifact generated by another process p1, without naming
the artifact?

This sentence indicate that we can identify the artifact by a 
sentence/query such as "a process p2 using  an
  artifact generated by another process p1", but there is no explicit URI.

> What do we lose if we refer to a resource as "something that can be 
> identified"? And what do we lose if we do not say that a resource is 
> "anything that has provenance"?

I agree.

I still don't understand what the provenance of resource is.  If the 
"container" idea for a resource is adopted,
what is the provenance of the container?

> I am writing while thinking aloud...
> -- Jun

>> Luc
>> On 05/25/2011 07:40 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:
>>> Luc Moreau wrote:
>>>> Hi Graham
>>>> I am coming back to an earlier comment of yours, see below.
>>> [...]
>>>> To clarify a point here.  Are you saying that a resource could be
>>>> anonymous (I.e, non identified)? But by the very fact we could have
>>>> given it a URI, it is indeed a resource as per this definition.
>>> Yes, exactly that!  (I prefer "non-identified" to "anonymous".)
>>> That's how I read and understand the AWWW/RFC3986 definitions.
>>> #g
>>> -- 

Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
Southampton SO17 1BJ               email:
United Kingdom           

Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2011 11:07:10 UTC