- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 16:02:32 +0100
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- CC: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Hi all, Following yesterday's discussion on roles, I made the following changes to prov-dm [1] . 1. Definition: A role is the function of an entity or agent with respect to an activity, in the context of a usage, generation, invalidation, association, start, and end. 2. Now roles are permitted in: Usage, Generation, Invalidation, Association, Start, and End 3. Removed example of role in attribution, replaced it by type I am closing this issue pending review. Luc [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/971bd0a3c287 On 05/24/2012 10:14 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-384 (prov-role-in-attribution): prov:role in attribution or not? [prov-dm] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/384 > > Raised by: Luc Moreau > On product: prov-dm > > > In the example, > http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#anexample-attribution, > we write: > wasAttributedTo(tr:WD-prov-dm-20111215, ex:Paolo, [prov:role="editor"]) > > > But in > http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#term-attribute-role > we say: > The attribute prov:role denotes the function of an entity with respect to an activity, in the context of a usage, generation, association, start, and end. > > > So, > 1. Do we want to accept prov:role in Attribution? > (or, it's not a prov:role but prov:type we should use?) > > 2. If yes, does it mean the definition of prov:role needs to be changed? where is the activity? > > 3. Should we have an optional activity in Attribution? > > Luc > > > > -- 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 Friday, 8 June 2012 15:02:59 UTC