Re: ProvenanceContainer (Re: Workflow Example in Formal Model HTML document)

Hi Paolo,
> "this means that any bundle of provenance assertions characterize a thing,
which is not the case."
Sorry, I am confused I though a bundle (or maybe a set) of provenance
assertion does characterize a thing.

For example, provenance assertions about a car A - its manufacturer, car
dealer who sold it, who owns it etc. characterize car A. These set of
"attribute-value" pairs are exactly same as PROV-DM ASN production rules for
an Entity.

Alternatively, if you meant that the bundle of provenance assertions
contained in a provenance container does not characterize the provenance
container - the postal envelope example illustrates that the contents of a
provenance container may characterize the container also (in this case the
envelope containing the letter written by Person X). Similarly a specific
XML document (with namespace etc.) is characterized to an extent by its
contents also.

Thanks.

Best,
Satya

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:01 AM, Paolo <pmissier@acm.org> wrote:

> HI,
>
> Khalid made what I thought was a very good point yesterday, and which was
> recorded in the skype chat:
>
> "If we assert that provenance container is a subclass of Entity, this means
> that any bundle of provenance assertions characterize a thing, which is not
> the case."
>
> isn't that a key argument?
>
> --Paolo
>
>
>
> On 9/29/11 6:21 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>
>> Hi Satya,
>>
>> A provenance container is not used to make a representation of something
>> in the World. It is a construct to bundle assertions together.
>>
>> An entity expression *is* an assertion.
>> A provenance container *is not* an assertion but contains assertions.
>>
>> I agree with you that your envelope contains letters. Both envelope and
>> letters are things, one containing the other. That can be *represented*
>> using collections and containment relationships.
>>
>>
>> Professor Luc Moreau
>> Electronics and Computer Science
>> University of Southampton
>> Southampton SO17 1BJ
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> On 29 Sep 2011, at 03:11, "Satya Sahoo"<satya.sahoo@case.edu<**mailto:
>> satya.sahoo@case.edu>>  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Luc,
>> We were not able to reach an agreement on how ProvenanceContainer is not a
>> specialized type of Entity during our ontology call on Monday due to time
>> constraints.
>>
>> To help better understand the differences and similarities, I copied the
>> two definition from PROV-DM to two documents and tried to compare them
>> side-by-side. The following are the two definitions:
>>
>> ===Entity====
>> In PROV-DM, an entity expression is a representation of an identifiable
>> characterized thing.
>>
>> ===ProvenanceContainer===
>> A provenance container is a house-keeping construct of PROV-DM, also
>> capable of bundling PROV-DM expressions. A provenance container is not an
>> expression, but can be exploited to return all the provenance assertions in
>> response to a request for the provenance of something ([PROV-PAQ]).
>>
>> According to the two definitions, a provenance container can be an
>> "identifiable characterized thing" (not being an expression is not a
>> conceptual constraint). Also, the ability to return all provenance
>> assertions in response can be applied to an Agent also - similar to a
>> software agent returning the current stock market quotes.
>>
>> Further, if an Entity "contains" provenance assertions it can still be an
>> "identifiable characterized thing" thereby satisfying our current definition
>> of Entity.
>>
>> During our ontology telcon today Paolo explained that the primary
>> difference between Entity and Provenance Container is that Provenance
>> Container can "contain" provenance assertions while Entity are assumed not
>> to contain assertions. But, this seems to be an application-specific
>> requirement.
>>
>> For example, for a person writing a 3-page letter the three pages will be
>> instances of Entity and the envelope containing the three pages will be a
>> container. But for the postal service personnel, who deal with thousands of
>> envelopes per day, the envelope is an Entity (and a sack for transporting
>> the envelopes will be a container).
>>
>> Hence, I believe the difference between what thing is a
>> ProvenanceContainer or an Entity is an application-specific
>> perspective/requirement and there is no fundamental difference between the
>> two terms - except that Provenance terms seems to be a specialized form an
>> Entity in the sense that Provenance Container contains provenance
>> assertions, while an Entity may or may not contain provenance assertions.
>>
>> Paolo suggested that we should bring up this issue to the WG mailing list
>> - hence I am cc'ing the mailing list also.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Best,
>> Satya
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Luc Moreau<<mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.**
>> soton.ac.uk <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>>L.Moreau@ecs.**soton.ac.uk<L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
>> <mailto:L.Moreau@**ecs.soton.ac.uk <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>>>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I thought we had already discussed this, but I see location as subtype of
>> entity.
>> Same issue as with provenance container.  This is not a subtype of entity.
>>
>> Luc
>> --
>>
>> Professor Luc Moreau
>> Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
>> <tel:%2B44%2023%208059%204487>
>> University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
>> <tel:%2B44%2023%208059%202865>
>> Southampton SO17 1BJ               email:<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.**
>> soton.ac.uk <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>>  l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk<**
>> mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.**uk <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>>
>> United Kingdom<http://www.ecs.soton.**ac.uk/~lavm<http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm>>
>>  http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~**lavm <http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> -----------  ~oo~  --------------
> Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
> School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK
> http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/**people/Paolo.Missier<http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier>
>
>