- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 17:32:32 -0500
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
On Feb 24, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Tim, > > Are you suggesting that we have single relation xxx -> Agent, > which covers wasAssociatedWith, actedonBehalfOf, and wasAttributedTo? I think it would be easiest to argue for an xxx that would replace wasAssociatedWith and wasAttributedTo. Adding actedOnBehalfOf to xxx might be a harder sell. The AgentInvolvement could easily cover the qualification of all three binary relations, being distinguishable by the type of the subject (Activity, Entity, and Agent) > > I think it's an idea really worth exploring, I am not entirely sure of the implications > of this design decision, but it could reduce the number of relations. Reducing the number of relations, and avoiding confusion about a small distinction (attribution, association) are my two goals for this ISSUE. > > I was thinking that as a minimum, all agent related notions, should be presented > in a single section, separate from the mechanics of Generation/Usage/Start/End of > Entity and Activity. I think this would be useful. -Tim > > Luc > > On 02/22/2012 05:34 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> PROV-ISSUE-258 (TLebo): consolidate Association / Responsibility / Affiliation [prov-dm] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/258 >> >> Raised by: Timothy Lebo >> On product: prov-dm >> >> Now that we have EntityInvolvement, we can cite an Agent and give it a prov:role. >> >> Following the "Involvement design", the subject of an EntityInvolvement may be either an Entity or an Activity (or anything else, really). >> >> I have been wrestling with confusion among Association / Responsibility / Affiliation. It has been hard to remember which _type_ of subject is used in which. >> >> But does it matter what the subject (and its type) is? I don't think so. What matters is that we can point to an Agent, say that they were responsible (in some way), and qualify how they were responsible. >> >> By recognizing that we don't need to distinguish among the subject types to assert responsibility, we can consolidate the concepts, involvements, and Involvements that currently make an uninteresting distinction. >> >> 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: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk > United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm > > >
Received on Saturday, 3 March 2012 22:33:05 UTC