- From: Simon Miles <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:56:45 +0000
- To: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
As with Khalid, I'm still a little unsure, but for the sake of making progress, I vote: +1 Proposal 1 +1 Proposal 2 +1 Proposal 3 +1 Proposal 4 +1 Proposal 5 +1 Proposal 6 +1 Proposal 7 I interpret Proposal 5 to mean that things are not in the universe of discourse separately from them being viewed as entities, and accept it on this basis. It is only in being entities that they must be identifiable (as per Proposal 1). A record is a thing, and so if Proposal 5 is accepted, so is Proposal 6, i.e. a record can have documented provenance but only if we view it as an entity. Similarly, a note is a thing (Proposal 7). +1 Proposal 8 As I understand, event ordering constraints are like physical laws that are not within PROV-DM data but can be used to judge whether what is described is realistic. If so, I agree that they are not part of the universe of discourse, but are things (as with records and notes above), in that their provenance *could* be documented or they could be part of some other entity's provenance. 0 Proposal 9 This seems less intuitive and I'm not yet convinced. Attributes seem to be of the same kind as entities, events, derivations etc., in that they are what is asserted to have existed in the past. Is the reason they are treated differently because they are too fine-grained and numerous to require identifiers for them all? If so, it makes more sense to me to say attributes are part of the universe of discourse but excluded from the requirement to be identifiable. Thanks, Simon On 25 January 2012 16:25, Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es> wrote: > +1 from my part too. > > Daniel > > > 2012/1/25 Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk> >> >> Hi >> >> as discussed, I agree with all the points below >> >> -Paolo >> >> >> >> On 1/25/12 3:38 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: >> >> All, >> >> 24h to go. We are trying to use the outcome of this vote to structure >> tomorrow's call. >> Thanks for your help. >> >> Luc >> >> On 01/24/2012 01:56 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: >> >> 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> ----------- ~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 > > -- Dr Simon Miles Lecturer, Department of Informatics Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK +44 (0)20 7848 1166 Provenance-based Validation of E-Science Experiments: http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1268/
Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2012 16:57:46 UTC