- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2012 13:44:14 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|b917aadce9e057d529cbb92f04f2c006o32DiH08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F7AF09E>
Hi Simon, Yes, it's a better definition that addresses my concern. Luc On 04/03/2012 09:32 AM, Miles, Simon wrote: > First, I think that we define entity in contrast to activity, so > people will only get what we're intending once they've read both > definitions. I don't think this is a problem, but means each > definition will necessarily be somewhat incomplete by itself. > I propose: > "An entity is a physical, digital, conceptual, or other kind of thing; > things may be real or imaginary." > Thanks, > Simon > Dr Simon Miles > Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics > Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK > +44 (0)20 7848 1166 > Requirements for Provenance on the Web: > http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1399/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Paul Groth [p.t.groth@vu.nl] > *Sent:* 03 April 2012 06:37 > *To:* Luc Moreau > *Cc:* Jim McCusker; public-prov-wg@w3.org > *Subject:* Re: PROV-ISSUE-223 (definition-of-entity): What is the > definition of entity [prov-dm] > > Hi Luc > > I think the definition is fine. If anything the first sentence should > be dropped. > > The fact that we can lookup the provenance of other things is beside > the point... > > > Regards > Paul > > On Apr 3, 2012, at 0:03, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk > <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote: > >> Hi Jim, >> >> I don't think that's what we want. >> prov:Entity is essentially a continuent, whereas prov:activity is an >> occurrent. >> >> What's a simpler way of defining prov:entity? >> >> Luc >> >> On 02/04/12 22:57, Jim McCusker wrote: >>> For what it's worth, this would align with the Basic Formal Ontology >>> definition of Entity: >>> >>> Entity is a Continuent or Occurrent. >>> >>> Continuent: An entity [bfo:Entity] that exists in full at any time >>> in which it exists at all, persists through time while maintaining >>> its identity and has no temporal parts. >>> >>> Occurrent: An entity [bfo:Entity] that has temporal parts and that >>> happens, unfolds or develops through time. Sometimes also called >>> perdurants. >>> >>> Jim >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk >>> <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote: >>> >>> All, >>> >>> We are now defining entity as follows: >>> >>> /An entity is a thing one wants to provide provenance for. For >>> the purpose of this specification, things can be physical, >>> digital, conceptual, or otherwise; things may be real or imaginary./ >>> >>> Unfortunately, we also provide provenance for activities, etc. >>> Last week, we agreed we could query the provenance of anything >>> that was identifiable. >>> >>> So, the definition of entity is too broad. >>> How should it be revised? Can reviewers think about it? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Luc >>> >>> >>> On 19/01/12 09:15, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >>>> PROV-ISSUE-223 (definition-of-entity): What is the definition of entity [prov-dm] >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/223 >>>> >>>> Raised by: Luc Moreau >>>> On product: prov-dm >>>> >>>> The prov-dm documents has some form of definition for entity [1] and entity record [2] (likewise, activity [5] and activity record [6]). >>>> >>>> Recent discussions indicate that the definitions are not rigorous enough, and subject to too much interpretation. >>>> >>>> Indications that an entity can potentially characterize multiple things [3], or that an entity is a class definition [4] are examples of the breadth of interpretation. >>>> >>>> The WG should aim to refine these definitions. >>>> >>>> [1]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#concept-entity >>>> [2]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#record-Entity >>>> [3]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Jan/0213.html >>>> [4]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Jan/0219.html >>>> [5]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#concept-activity >>>> [6]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#record-Activity >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jim McCusker >>> Programmer Analyst >>> Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics >>> Yale School of Medicine >>> james.mccusker@yale.edu <mailto:james.mccusker@yale.edu> | (203) >>> 785-6330 >>> http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu >>> >>> PhD Student >>> Tetherless World Constellation >>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute >>> mccusj@cs.rpi.edu <mailto:mccusj@cs.rpi.edu> >>> http://tw.rpi.edu -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2012 12:44:47 UTC