- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 15:54:14 +0000
- To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Go ahead, close this issue. Given the way proper provenance has evolved, I don't think a new issue is required. Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom On 7 May 2012, at 16:43, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: > Luc, > > On May 7, 2012, at 11:37 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > >> It's a very old issue. > > Yes :-) > >> I thought it was agreed that all properties (which dont encode relations) of an entity would be regarded as attributes. > > Yes, I believe this was the resolution. > I think this issue can be closed. > > However, you morphed this issue into a note about "proper" provenance (in March). > So may I ask that you open a new issue for that concern, so that I can close this? > > Thanks, > Tim > >> >> Professor Luc Moreau >> Electronics and Computer Science >> University of Southampton >> Southampton SO17 1BJ >> United Kingdom >> >> >> On 7 May 2012, at 16:30, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: >> >>> Luc, >>> >>> I'm looking to close this issue. >>> >>> "proper" provenance is not part of the current prov-o WD. >>> >>> As you know, the building story in prov-o is "starting points, expanded, qualified" and then "collections". >>> >>> Since the notion of "proper" has evolved since F2F2, could you summarize what aspects you think should still be addressed in prov-o? >>> For me, the notion of proper hinges around specOf, where "improper" asserters assert details on less specific entities than they should. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Tim, >>>> >>>> I think that somewhere in the prov-o html document, there should be a section >>>> that talks about "proper" provenance (or whatever its name is), and discusses attributes. >>>> So, as long as we remember to discuss this, I think we can close the issue. >>>> >>>> Luc >>>> >>>> On 05/03/12 22:06, Timothy Lebo wrote: >>>>> On Mar 5, 2012, at 4:42 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Tim, >>>>>> >>>>>> Indeed, we no longer make the distinction between characterizing and non-characterizing attributes. >>>>>> >>>>>> In "proper" provenance, attributes are still very important, since they help describe a "partial state". >>>>>> Hence, some constraints exist around attributes: >>>>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm-constraints.html#account-and-accountEntity >>>>>> (For instance, see 3rd bullet point). >>>>>> >>>>> Yes, the 3rd bullet and "It is not permitted to add new attributes to a given entity" in the note. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> But I think we came to the conclusion that any rdf property for an entity is regarded as an attribute. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Isn't it the answer to this issue? >>>>>> >>>>> I hope that it is. I am comfortable with the phrasing in the DM. >>>>> Any rdf property outside of the prov namespace that describes and Entity is "fixed". >>>>> (as you noted, we can "use" it again, so that would make a new attribute within the prov namespace but that did not affect the partial state.) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Does this mean we can close the issue? Do we need the DM to say something further in light of this ISSUE? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> -Tim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Luc >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 05/03/12 19:13, Timothy Lebo wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Luc, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The distinction between characterizing attributes and non-characterizing attributes has faded in the latest versions of the DM. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you still have concerns about being able to find "frozen" attributes for a given entity? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sep 2, 2011, at 4:52 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> PROV-ISSUE-89 (what-entity-attributes): How do we find the attributes of an entity? [Formal Model] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/89 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Raised by: Luc Moreau >>>>>>>> On product: Formal Model >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The conceptual model defines an entity in terms of an identifier and a list of attribute-value pairs. It is indeed crucial for the asserter to identify the attributes that have been frozen in a given entity. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Currently, the ontology does not seem to identify these attributes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To say that these attributes could be found by looking at all the properties for this entity does not work with an open world assumption. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What mechanism do we have to identify these attributes? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 15:54:47 UTC