Re: PROV-ISSUE-237 (TLebo): Rename Relation to Involvement [prov-dm]

Hi, Luc,

On Feb 6, 2012, at 4:32 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:

> Hi Tim,
> 
> I am keen to replace 'relation' (and 'element') by more appropriate names.

I'm not adverse to "element", I find it as good as any.

> 
> I am not sure why 'involvement'?  involvement in what?


Entities and Activities are involved with other Entities and Activities by way of prov assertions.


involve |inˈvälv|
verb [ trans. ]
(of a situation or event) include (something) as a necessary part or result : his transfer to another school would involve a lengthy assessment procedure.
• cause (a person or group) to experience or participate in an activity or situation : what kind of organizations will be involved in setting up these projects?


> 
> How appropriate is it for alternateOf?

I don't think these two would be a kind of involvement :-/
So I guess we're back to Relation.

-Tim




> 
> Thanks,
> Luc
> 
> On 06/02/12 21:01, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> PROV-ISSUE-237 (TLebo): Rename Relation to Involvement [prov-dm]
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/237
>> 
>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>> On product: prov-dm
>> 
>> I propose to rename "Relation" in PROV-DM to "Involvement" because "Relation" is too broad and a provenance interchange should limit itself to how agents, activities, and entities were involved with one another as the lead to some result.
>> 
>> Relations other than involvements should be out of scope for provenance interchange (and seem to be already be handled with the attribute-values).
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>   
> 
>