Provenance Incubator Group Teleconference

20 Aug 2010

See also: IRC log


[IPcaller], michaelp, [ISI], +1.915.747.aaaa, +1.706.461.aabb


<trackbot> Date: 20 August 2010

thanks Simon!

Agenda item 1: Gap analysis for the Disease Outbreak scenario

James added a number of references to the section on "Relevant Research on Provenance"

Yolanda and James added the gap analysis items

All the items from the gap analysis of the News Aggregator scenario are relevant to this DO scenario as well, so they are all incorporated

On the issue of overlap of gap analysis across scenarios, we thought it was good to reiterate the conclusions to make a stronger case of why they are important

James suggests that we distinguish issues that can be resolved by developing a system or solution, versus items that require the development of standards and general mechanisms and infrastructure

Jun mentions that from medical researchers a big issue is dealing with granularity of provenance

We deal with granularity in two ways: 1) how to attach provenance to collections of objects, 2) abstraction when reporting provenance to a user. The former is under content, the latter is under use.

Yolanda encourages everyone to continue to contribute references and comments to the scenario, but we will not be discussing details in future telecons

Agenda item 2: Discuss provenance research relevant to the Business Contract scenario

Simon points to his email where he mentions relevant work: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-prov/2010Aug/0029.html

Yolanda mentions that this scenario is unique in highlighting justification and privacy in provenance, also unlike the other two it does not have the issue of integration from various sources

Paulo brings up issues in privacy: the provenance is recorded internally in a system, then at publication time you want to move the records out and make them public.

Michael responds that a system internally has to manage persistence

Yolanda suggests to highlight in this scenario the importance of standards: even though there are only two parties in the scenario that care about the provenance and could agree to a shared representation between them, we should highlight that the company has many customers and would not want to develop a new provenance representation for each customer so a standard is useful

Yolanda: next week we will discuss the gap analysis for the Business Contract scenario, and wrap up this scenario analysis in a concise document

Agenda was at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-prov/2010Aug/0028.html

<scribe> Scribe: YolandaGil

trackbot, end telcon

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2010/08/20 16:07:00 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: YolandaGil
Inferring ScribeNick: YolandaGil

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

Default Present: [IPcaller], michaelp, [ISI], +1.915.747.aaaa, +1.706.461.aabb
Present: [IPcaller] michaelp [ISI] +1.915.747.aaaa +1.706.461.aabb

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 20 Aug 2010
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/08/20-prov-xg-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]