Re: Issue 89 - why?

Hi Khalid and Graham,

Attributes help characterize a thing in the world.
Provenance helps explain why these attributes have specific values.
In particular, constraints such as
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#derivation-attributes
link attribute values to something in the provenance of an entity.

In addition, there may be arbitrary properties that are not attributes, i.e.
they are not characterizing a thing.
For instance, the model document mentions the icon used to render an 
entity graphically.
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#expression-annotationAssociation

If an entity is given arbitrary properties,  I think it's important 
whether this
is a characterizing attribute (for which we may find an explanation in 
the provenance),
or whether this is a non characterizing property (which may have nothing 
to with
the thing in the world, as the icon example).


Cheers,
Luc

On 17/09/11 11:55, Khalid Belhajjame wrote:
> On 17/09/2011 08:07, Graham Klyne wrote:
>> I've been reading some of the discussion of Issue 89:
>>
>>   http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/89
>>
>> which seems to my mind be getting rather like a counting of 
>> angels-on-pinheads, and I wonder if we're not in danger of 
>> over-ontologizing here.
>>
>> Going back to the original issue, I see:
>>
>> [[
>> The conceptual model defines an entity in terms of an identifier and 
>> a list of attribute-value pairs. It is indeed crucial for the 
>> asserter to identify the attributes that have been frozen in a given 
>> entity.
>> ]]
>>
>> Why is it so crucial to identify what attributes have been frozen?
>>
>> What practical application of provenance is prevented is we don't 
>> require this?
>>
>
> I second that. Furthermore, I don't see the point of declaring 
> attributes that are not instanciated in the context of the entity.
>
> Khalid
>
>> #g
>> -- 
>>
>>
>
>

Received on Monday, 19 September 2011 15:36:31 UTC