- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 16:40:45 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi I am proposing to close this issue since, as the example [1] on attribution of provenance shows, asserter can be expressed by mean of wasAttributedTo. Regards, Luc [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#section-example-c On 01/16/2012 05:38 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-217 (account-asserter): What is the asserter of an account? [prov-dm] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/217 > > Raised by: Luc Moreau > On product: prov-dm > > The prov-dm document contains the following note, in the account section: > > Currently, the non-terminal asserter is defined as IRI and its interpretation is outside PROV-DM. We may want the asserter to be an agent instead, and therefore use PROV-DM to express the provenance of PROV-DM assertions. The editors seek inputs on how to resolve this issue. > > Tim, in his design of accounts, is running ahead, making assumptions about the asserter. > > So, are we supporting the following proposal: > an Account asserter is an agent. > > Following this, a further question follows. > Assuming we have an entity ex:acc representing an account > entity(ex:acc) // details to be finalized when we understand what identifiers are > and we express some provenance: > wasGenerated(ex:acc,ex:activity) > wasAttributed(ex:acc,ex:agent) > .... > > Do we have any restrictions about where these provenance records can occur? > Can they be for instance included inside the account itself? > > Or should they necessarily be occurring outside the account? > > Thanks, > 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 Wednesday, 28 March 2012 15:41:17 UTC