Re: PROV-ISSUE-498: Data Model Table 2 [prov-dm]

Dear all,

Find a proposed answer to ISSUE-498.

Regards,
Luc


>       ISSUE-498 (Relation terminology)
>
>   * Original
>     email:http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0088.html
>   * Tracker:http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/498
>   * Group Response:
>       o PROV-DM is a/conceptual model/, whose core contains the
>         following concepts: Entity, Activity, Agent, Generation,
>         Usage, Communication, Derivation, Attribution, Association,
>         Delegation. Each concept is named with a noun. They are all
>         listed in the overview
>         table:http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#overview-types-and-relations
>       o Overall, this issue has already been addressed, through ISSUE
>         409 and 502:
>           + In the response to issue 502, the Working Group has
>             confirmed that it sees a derivation as a transformation.
>           + Likewise, in the response to issue 499, the Working Group
>             has confirmed that generation is not an activity.
>   * References:
>       o Response to
>         ISSUE-502:http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-502_.28Derivation.29
>       o Response to
>         ISSUE-499:http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-499_.28Generation_vs_Activity.29
>   * Changes to the document:
>   * Original author's acknowledgement:
>
>
>       [edit
>       <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/index.php?title=ResponsesToPublicComments&action=edit&section=44>]
>



On 09/10/2012 09:31 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-498: Data Model Table 2 [prov-dm]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/498
>
> Raised by: Luc Moreau
> On product: prov-dm
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Table_2
>
> ISSUE-463
>
>
> All of the relations are verbs and therefore readers may consider them to be activities. In fact, the temptation to think of the concepts (e.g., generation, usage, communication) as activities is so strong that I was significantly confused by this for some time. It was only after several hours reading the spec that I was able to start to think of them as stated relationships rather than as activities.
>
> For example, derivation seems to be a type of activity (e.g., In section 2.1.2, example 6 lists four examples, all of which use the verb "transformation". This term is also part of the definition of "activity" (section 2.1.1) so to those that are not intimately familiar with PROV, it seems quite clear that derivation is a type of activity.
>
> It may be helpful to explicitly state (and re-state) the distinction between assertions and activities, and/or select different terms when needed. For example, the actual activity that creates an entity is distinct from the expression of the relationship between them, but the term "generation" could be used to describe both concepts.
>
>
>
>

-- 
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