- From: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:19:30 +0100
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAExK0DeXYc24mEaGG7G5bkBNmPEe=SsWMnmAuyhnmq0NvUEBYw@mail.gmail.com>
ok then :) 2012/1/24 Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> > ** > Hi Daniel, > I had left the call by then. I am not claiming that the proposals here > were all discussed > yesterday, and vice-versa that all you discussed yesterday is reflected in > the proposals. > There are other issues with accounts, which need to be taken into ... > account. > Luc > > On 01/24/2012 02:09 PM, Daniel Garijo wrote: > > Hi Luc, > Accounts are missing. According to what we discussed yesterday, they > should be part of the > universe of discourse. > > If you consider accounts as Entities, then they would be included in > proposal 1 (along with Agents), > but some people argued that there could be cases of Accounts not being > Entities, so that's why I ask. > > Thanks, > Daniel > > 2012/1/24 Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> > >> All, >> >> Paul and I have a strong desire to resolve the issue related to >> identifiers before F2F2. >> >> For information, we agreed on the following last week: >> * *All* objects of discourse ("entities") MUST be identifiable by all >> participants in discourse. Object descriptions ("entity records" and >> otherwise) SHOULD use an unambiguous identifier (either reusing an >> existing identifier, or introducing a new identifier) for the objects >> described." (intent) * >> >> So, the next challenge (ISSUE-225) is to agree on the objects that belong >> to universe of discourse. >> To facilitate the call on Thursday, we are putting forward a series of >> proposals. Can >> you express your support or not in the usual manner. On Thursday we >> will discuss >> proposals for which we didn't reach consensus. >> >> Regards, >> Luc >> >> Proposal 1: Entities and Activities belong to the universe of discourse. >> >> Proposal 2: Events (Entity Usage event, Entity Generation Event, >> Activity Start Event, Activity End event) belong to the universe of >> discourse >> >> Proposal 3: Derivation, Association, Responsibility chains, >> Traceability, Activity Ordering, Revision, Attribution, Quotation, >> Summary, Original SOurce, CollectionAfterInsertion/Collection After >> removal belong to the universe of discourse. >> >> Proposal 4: AlternateOf and SpecializationOf belong to the universe of >> discourse >> >> Proposal 5: Records do not belong to the Universe of discourse >> This includes Account Record. >> >> Proposal 6: Things do no belong to the universe of discourse >> Note >> >> Proposal 7: Note/hasAnnotation do not belong to the universe of discourse >> >> Proposal 8: Event ordering constraints do not belong to the universe of >> discourse. >> >> Proposal 9: Attributes do not belong to the universe of discourse. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 >> >> > > -- > 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, 24 January 2012 14:20:01 UTC