- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:44:29 +0200
- To: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi I'm happy with the response but is this something we can add to the FAQ. Namely Q: When should I use prov:Agent and its subtypes? prov:Agent assigns responsibility. ...... This could be marked in the proposed change. What do people think? Thanks Paul On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > > I have drafted a response to this issue on the wiki at: > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-520_.28Person.2FOrganization.2FSoftwareAgent.29 > I copy the text below for your convience. > > Feedback, suggestions welcome. > Luc > > > ISSUE-520 (Person/Organization/SoftwareAgent) > > Original email: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0110.html > Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/520 > Group Response: > > The reason why the WG introduced agents in the PROV model is to be able to > assign responsibility for an activity taking place, for the existence of an > entity, or for another agent's activity. > For inter-operability reason, the WG also believed it is useful to define > commonly encountered types of agents: Person, SoftwareAgent, and > Organization. Agents of type prov:Person are people responsible for > something; agents of type prov:SoftwareAgent are running software > responsible for something; etc > Given this, it is not appropriate to make Person/SoftwareAgent/Organization > subtypes of Entity, since entities by default do not bear responsibility in > the PROV model. It is the notion of prov:Agent that carries responsibility, > in PROV. > If one wishes to introduce a type of person, as an entity, without > associating any responsibility, then there are ontologies, outside PROV, > which allow for that. FOAF concepts such as foaf:Person, foaf:Organization > may be relevant. With these, one can write entity(e, > [prov:type='foaf:Person']) > > References: > > foaf:Person: http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_Person > foaf:Organization: http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_Organization > > References: > Proposed changes: none > Original author's acknowledgement: > > > > On 10/09/2012 09:47, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > > PROV-ISSUE-520: Data Model Section 5.3.1 [prov-dm] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/520 > > Raised by: Luc Moreau > On product: prov-dm > > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Section_5.3.1 > > ISSUE-463 > > Given their definitions, Entities (or Activities) act as Agents for > Activities. Since Person, Software, and Organization all fit the definition > of Entity, I believe they should be specializations of Entity rather than > Agent, which is a role that Entities can play in a given context. > > > > > > > > -- > 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 > -- -- Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ Assistant Professor - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group | Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science - The Network Institute VU University Amsterdam
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2012 14:48:50 UTC