W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > November 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-147 (Replace recipe): Change the name if "Recipe" [Data Model]

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 23:59:04 +0000
Message-ID: <CAPRnXt=mpcvW9hP6ykJyU1nJco9p3kpQcQhD26V2r3LrLV0_6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu>
Cc: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 23:00, Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu> wrote:

> Any software agent will be always be a process. It is up to the application
> to model it as an agent (Email client, virus etc.) or a process (as in
> activity) - similar to "one person's metadata is another person's data"...

A plan can also be intended for humans. If you want to model me as a
process, that's fine, but perhaps a bit unintuitive at first.

As I'm about to unpack and assemble my IKEA book case, I might collect
the provenance for this.

In this case the assembled piece of furniture has gone through various
process executions such as "unpacking", "aligning", "screwing", etc. -
these are all executed by me (the agent, in the role of "assembler"),
somewhat according to the assembly instructions (the plan). However I
might find that I don't agree with the plan, so it's not just
"interpreted".


On a higher-level picture you can imagine an Assembly process
execution which controls all these smaller operations (lacking any
other way to express subprocesses), and uses both myself
(role="worker"), the assembly instructions (role="instructions") and
the packed box of furniture parts (role="parts").

-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 00:00:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:04 UTC