- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 15:41:12 +0000
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
On 23/11/2011 15:37, Simon Miles wrote: > Graham, > > Coming back to one of your comments on the primer: > >> 2.1 Entities >> >> I think this doesn't really capture the relationship between entities and things >> that may change, which is a key motivator for introducing the notion of >> "Entities". Cf. >> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/provenance-access.html#provenance--entities-and-resources >> for possible adaptable text (though in this context you may prefer to avoid the >> dependence on Web resources.) > > I agree that the primer text didn't adequately capture this. Just to > be clear we mean the same thing, entities *are* things that can > change, right? It's just that as soon as an attribute by which they > are characterised changes, then it is no longer that entity. I think so. I'd say an entity may be a view or version of something that can change, but when that thing changes it may cease to be an instance of that entity. (Almost exactly what you said, I think, but trying to allow that the constraints may be such that the entity-thing cannot change without ceasing to be that entity.) > ... A web > resource is an entity, even if there are also more specific > characterisations. Absolutely yes, IMO. > I found it difficult to extract the PAQ text from the web context and > seemed longer than ideal for the primer intuition section, so went > back to the DM spec and tried to work some text from there. > > I tried adding some text (third paragraph) to the primer section > below. Is this adequate? > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html#entities I think so. I think it addresses the motivation for introducing the notion of entity. #g
Received on Friday, 25 November 2011 10:11:42 UTC