- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:36:06 +0100
- To: public-xg-prov@w3.org
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|0294efda021503b5a94e7110e5e6e135n5Q8a908L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4E0832E6>
Hi Paolo, all, I am catching up with emails sent for the last 5 days. Your suggestion of formalizing definitions is good, but it is not what we were trying to do here. We wanted to provide *natural language definitions* for all concepts, so that we begin to share a common vocabulary. Once we have this, we can then: - define an ontology/schema for the terminology, so that we can represent provenance - define a semantics - iteratively, inform and refine the natural language definitions Therefore, we need to be reasonable. We might argue for the next 6 months about the English definition of a Thing. What will it bring us? In fact, we are in serious danger of making the face to face meeting unproductive, since we are not going to have definitions of concepts. I would argue that we should have "strawman" definitions for all concepts, including version and collections (recognizing though that we will not have reached agreement by then). Regards, Luc On 06/23/2011 03:52 PM, Paolo Missier wrote: > 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 > -- 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 Monday, 27 June 2011 07:36:48 UTC