- From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:10:46 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|3fac15f0b76ec66ae8b133152a5eff98o8PEAl08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|5062FED6>
Dear all, Both ISSUE-519 and ISSUE-523 relate to Influence. I drafted a response, outlining some changes to be made to prov-dm. I would like the group to make a resolution at the teleconference on Thursday, before implementing the changes. Best regards, Luc PS. Wiki: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-519_and_ISSUE-523_.28Influence_Inheritance.29 ISSUE-519 and ISSUE-523 (Influence Inheritance) * Original email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0109.html * Original email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0113.html * Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/519 * Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/523 * Group Response: o First, a reminder that UML diagrams are informative. o The prov-constraints document provides normative information about Influence. See Inference 15. o For instance, the following inference is permitted, allowing to infer a wasInfluencedBy statement from a wasGeneratedBy statement. IF wasGeneratedBy(id; e,a,_t,attrs) THEN wasInfluencedBy(id; e, a, attrs). * o Whatever appears as id/attributes in wasGeneratedBy becomes also id/attributes in wasInfluencedBy o Whatever appears as entity (e) in wasGeneratedBy becomes influencee in wasInfluencedBy o Whatever appears as activity (a) in wasGeneratedBy becomes influencer in wasInfluencedBy o Given this, prov-dm should define the minimalist characteristics for wasInfluencedBy in a technology agnostic way. o Inheritance is a way of implementing Inference 15 of prov-constraints (and this approach was successfully followed by prov-o), but it does not have to be implemented that way. For instance, a rule based system could simply implement Inference 15 without requiring inheritance. The current prov-xml schema does not define WasGeneratedBy as an extension if Influence. A record based system may not rely on inheritance. o As the author suggests, inheritance would imply that attributes are inherited by the children relation. It is not the case that wasGeneratedBy has influencer/influencee attributes, but instead, we want to show that they correspond to activity/entity in that case. o Given this, the Working Group has decided that: + The UML diagram in Figure 8 should not show a Generalization association between WasGeneratedBy (and others) and WasInfluencedBy. + A table should be introduced showing which attributes in Generation/Usage/etc are influencer or influencee. o With these changes, the issue raised by the author is no longer applicable: it is no longer the case that wasGeneratedBy etc can be used anywhere between agent/activity/entity. o For the comment "The notion of influence is useful for the PROV model, but it is unclear whether this is intended to represent an extension point for adopters of the spec. How should it be implemented?", we have shown with prov-o, prov-n, and prov-xml various ways of implementing Influence. According to Section 6, Influence is not seen as an extensibility point of the model, instead, it is seen as a means to express influence in PROV without being specific about its nature. We note the following, quoted from the specification: + It is recommended to adopt these more specific relations when writing provenance descriptions. It is anticipated that the Influence relation may be useful to express queries over provenance information. * References: o Inference 15: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-constraints-20120911/#influence-inference o Current xml schema: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/f0e8bc2ae457/xml/schema/prov.xsd o Extensibility section: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#extensibility-section * Proposed changes: TODO when vote * Original author's acknowledgement: [edit <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/index.php?title=ResponsesToPublicComments&action=edit§ion=39>] On 10/09/2012 09:47, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-519: Data Model Figure 8 [prov-dm] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/519 > > Raised by: Luc Moreau > On product: prov-dm > > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Figure_8 > > ISSUE-463 > > The figure incorrectly indicates that any child association can be used between and among the entity, activity, and agent classes. It would be more accurate to remove the labels from the solid associations and use the dashed lines to trace each relationship to its associated child association rather than to the parent class. > > > > > -- 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, 26 September 2012 13:11:17 UTC