- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 21:27:35 +0100
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Luc, Mainly, I was suggesting the text refer to it as an "Entity assertion". I am less concerned at this stage by the functor name used in the PASN and/or the OWL class name with which the assertions are associated. But I would not object to what you suggest if you feel that is more consistent (though, depending on how the mapping to OWL/RDF works, it _might_ be that Entity is a more appropriate name for the OWL class - in other words, I don't really know until I see how the OWL/RDF mapping is defined). #g -- On 05/09/2011 17:22, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Graham, > > Are you suggesting that the OWL class should become EntityAssertion? > and in the provenance abstract syntax notation we write entityAssertion(...)? > > Luc > > > On 09/05/2011 04:13 PM, Graham Klyne wrote: >> Luc, >> >> The problem is that the term "Entity" suggests the things rather than the >> assertion about the thing. It's taken me a while to figure out that's not how >> you are currently using it. I think others could have a similar problem. >> >> Personally, I'd go with Simon's definition for "Entity", and use "Entity >> assertion" for the PIDL construct: I think those terms better match people's >> expectations of what they mean, and clearly expose how they are related. >> >> #g >> -- >> >> On 05/09/2011 08:23, Luc Moreau wrote: >>> Hi Simon, >>> >>> I don't know what you have gained by introducing this definition, except >>> a more compact terminology. We have tried to use "identifiable characterized >>> thing" >>> consistently across the text, to refer to this concept. >>> >>> There was a *very strong* indication (at F2F and after) from the WG, that >>> we should not use the same label for the PIDM construct and the concept. >>> As editors, we have followed the WG wish. >>> >>> For this reason, I am proposing not to change the text. Instead, we should >>> talk about "identifiable characterized thing". >>> >>> Same comment applies to activity vs process execution. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Luc >>> >>> >>> PS ISSUE-85 >>> >>> On 09/03/2011 03:40 PM, Simon Miles wrote: >>>> Defn 1. An entity*is* an identifiable characterized thing. >>> >
Received on Monday, 5 September 2011 20:37:42 UTC