W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > September 2011

RE: provenance questionnaire, v2

From: Michael Miller <Michael.Miller@systemsbiology.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 07:41:43 -0700
Message-ID: <659265c3de89617c31618fa6ba73a670@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Deus, Helena" <helena.deus@deri.org>, Egon Willighagen <egon.willighagen@gmail.com>
Cc: public-lod@w3.org, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
hi all,

i would think that an authorization trail would be very important (a quick
search on the web for 'provenance authorization' came up with many hits so
perhaps there is already one that can be incorporated).

in the museum world, for art works that disappeared during world war two,
if a museum with a missing piece didn't have authorization from the museum
it came from as part of the provenance, they are obliged to return it.  i
would also think it would be important facet for certain queries.


Michael Miller
Software Engineer
Institute for Systems Biology

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org [mailto:public-semweb-
> lifesci-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Deus, Helena
> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 2:18 AM
> To: Egon Willighagen
> Cc: public-lod@w3.org; public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
> Subject: RE: provenance questionnaire, v2
> Thanks Egon,
> The provenance wg has been briefly concerned with authorization, but
> nothing too concrete has been devised yet.
> I will forward you concerns to the provenance workgroup.
> Cheers,
> Lena
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Egon Willighagen [mailto:egon.willighagen@gmail.com]
> Sent: 06 September 2011 09:03
> To: Deus, Helena
> Cc: public-lod@w3.org; public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
> Subject: Re: provenance questionnaire, v2
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Deus, Helena <helena.deus@deri.org>
> wrote:
> > For those of you who haven't answered and would like to give your 2c
> > about how provenance should be dealt with on the semantic web, here's
> your chance!
> Authorization would probably not be considered provenance, but I was
> wondering if the WG has been talking about that, and if there is an
> existing ontology that would be suitable for that, compatible with the
> provenance ontology... it's clear that at least the depositors
> (provenance) have authorization, so compatibility at that level seems
> needed... Or?
> Egon
> --
> Dr E.L. Willighagen
> Postdoctoral Researcher
> Institutet för miljömedicin
> Karolinska Institutet (http://ki.se/imm)
> Homepage: http://egonw.github.com/
> LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/in/egonw
> Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
> PubList: http://www.citeulike.org/user/egonw/tag/papers
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 14:42:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:21:00 UTC