further comments on IPV

Greetings,
   I am slowly catching up and I have decided to start from what is recorded in the wiki rather than trying to playback  long and 
winding threads.

sorry to vent, but I started with "Concept 'Invariant View or Perspective on a Thing'"and I am already utterly confused. For a 
member of the Model TF who is tasked with a synthesising and reconciling job, this is not good :-)
So I appended some comments of my own here, which are mostly questions:  
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Comment_by_PM__24_June_2011.3D

The main message is: I really feel the need for some precision, which doesn't mean formalising at all costs, but at least picking a 
reference framework for modelling: ER, objects, UML... something that has, er, a clear semantics that one can build upon! (ok, so 
perhaps UML does not qualify :-))

Regards, -Paolo