Re: PROV-ISSUE-216 (TLebo): qualified wasAttributedTo? [prov-dm]

Hi Tim,

Revisiting your request, I don't understand it.
An attribution record already contains optional attribute-value pairs.
What do you mean by qualified wasAttributedTo relation?


On 01/16/2012 02:31 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> This seems like a reasonable request.
> It looks like all our relations should have attributes.
> Luc
> On 01/15/2012 04:37 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> PROV-ISSUE-216 (TLebo): qualified wasAttributedTo? [prov-dm]
>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>> On product: prov-dm
>> Accounts will likely be associated to their asserters with the 
>> prov:wasAttributedTo binary relation.
>> Would the DM be able to have qualified wasAttributedTo relations?
>> I think that it would be a natural question for a consumer, upon 
>> hearing that "account x was from agent y", to want to ask about how, 
>> when, or in what situation agent y stated those things (e.g., under 
>> oath in a courtroom, on twitter 2am on a Friday night, etc).
>> Hopefully, the Qualified wasAttributedTo would follow the pattern of 
>> the varying "precisions" (i.e., granularity) for wasDerivedFrom, 
>> which may relate an activity that draws the Account to the asserter.
>> Thanks,
>> Tim

Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
Southampton SO17 1BJ               email:
United Kingdom           

Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 10:46:55 UTC