IRC log of prov on 2011-09-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:02:52 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #prov
16:02:52 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:02:54 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
16:02:54 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #prov
16:02:55 [tlebo]
tlebo has joined #prov
16:02:56 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be
16:02:56 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
16:02:57 [trackbot]
Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
16:02:58 [trackbot]
Date: 26 September 2011
16:03:06 [Luc]
Zakim, this will be PROV
16:03:06 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, Luc
16:03:15 [tlebo]
wiki for this meeting:
16:03:24 [stain]
16:04:33 [Luc]
Zakim, this will be SW_(OWL)
16:04:33 [Zakim]
ok, Luc, I see SW_(OWL)12:00PM already started
16:04:54 [tlebo]
16:04:55 [Luc]
rrsagent, make logs public
16:05:03 [Luc]
Chair: Satya
16:05:40 [Zakim]
16:06:34 [khalidbelhajjame]
khalidbelhajjame has joined #prov
16:07:26 [Luc]
what is provenanceContainer in entity? I don't understand the notation used.
16:07:59 [stain]
file:///home/stain/stuff/src/provenance-wg/prov/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html#provenancecontainer I guess
16:08:14 [stain]
that is a subclass
16:08:48 [Paolo_]
16:09:16 [Zakim]
16:09:44 [tlebo]
TODO: break all visual abbreviations - show rdfs:subClassOf directly.
16:09:54 [stain]
Luc does not like that a ProvenanceContainer is a subclass of Entity
16:10:05 [tlebo]
TODO: ensure that the ProvenanceContainer is no longer an Entity. (Tim)
16:10:17 [Luc]
it's not that Luc doesn't like. It does not match the data model.
16:10:43 [stain]
In PROV-DM, an entity expression is a representation of an identifiable characterized thing.
16:10:48 [stain]
so is the provcontainer not one of those?
16:11:25 [Luc]
16:11:25 [tlebo]
luc: top level classes: ProvenanceContainer, Account, Entity, ProcessExecution
16:11:55 [stain]
16:12:00 [Luc]
16:12:34 [Paolo_]
16:12:38 [Paolo_]
16:12:44 [satya]
This is PROV-ISSUE-66
16:12:50 [tlebo]
paolo: we are not "directly" asserting provenance of ProvenanceContainer
16:14:23 [dgarijo]
dgarijo has joined #prov
16:14:35 [khalidbelhajjame]
I think we should just stick to the data model as much as possible
16:15:42 [dgarijo]
@khalid: yes, of course. But if the model is designed for asserting provenance, then it should provide the mechanisms to assert provenance about provenance records too!
16:16:10 [khalidbelhajjame]
16:16:27 [Luc]
satya, there is a type error!
16:17:30 [tlebo]
(the objective of the diagram was to illustrate how a third party could extend PROV - does anyone have feedback on how well/poorly this is conveyed?)
16:17:49 [dgarijo]
could you provide the link to the diagram, please? I joined late :(
16:18:01 [stain]
tlebo: I think it's good, but I wonder if we could show extension by subproperties or subclass
16:18:02 [tlebo]
16:18:20 [stain]
just adding new attributes to an prov:Entity is merely how entity is to be used anyway..?
16:18:45 [tlebo]
@stian: news:Entity">news:Entity subclass prov:Entity , THEN assert the domains on news:Entity ?
16:18:58 [Luc]
you can take multiple perspective on a provenance container: it's a curated set of assertions, it's a set of triples in a triple store, it's a 'platonic' set of triples, it's something in a database.
16:18:58 [stain]
so Journalist subclass of Agent, or Publishing subclass of ProcessExecution might be interesting. But then you are very close to the danger of touching on roles..
16:19:08 [Luc]
Each of them can be modelled by an entity expression.
16:19:47 [Luc]
An apple is represented by an entity expression, which involves selecting some attributes
16:20:10 [khalidbelhajjame]
16:21:51 [stain] says
16:21:54 [stain]
Note: Currently, the non-terminal asserter is defined as URI. We may want the asserter to be an agent instead, and therefore use PROV-DM to express the provenance of PROV-DM assertions. The editors seek inputs on how to resolve this issue.
16:22:03 [stain]
is this what we've briefly touched on?
16:23:40 [Luc]
yes stain
16:23:51 [dgarijo]
I have to agree with Satya
16:23:58 [dgarijo]
I don't see the difference either.
16:25:09 [dgarijo]
if a prov container can be set of statements, and we are able to refer to them and assert triples using them as source, then it has a identifier.
16:26:47 [Paolo_]
the corollary of what Luc is saying, i.e., viewing a provenance container as a "thing in the world", is that you don't need to make ProvenanceContainer a subclass of Entity in order to do "meta-provenance"
16:27:21 [stain]
so Luc's point is that there (could be) other attributes you need to specify, like the location the provenance container is stored in, or description of its content, etc - many entities
16:28:02 [dgarijo]
16:28:09 [khalidbelhajjame]
En entity is a characterization of a thing, provenance container is not necessarily a characterization of a thing.
16:29:07 [stain]
mm.. so there's nothing saying a ProvContainer *is not* an entity, but it would probably not be a good entity on its own because there are many ways to describe such meta-provenance
16:29:43 [khalidbelhajjame]
A provContainer can be a characterization, but not necessarily one.
16:30:33 [satya]
16:30:43 [satya]
ack daniel
16:31:13 [dgarijo]
16:31:18 [dgarijo]
ack satya
16:32:42 [tlebo]
16:32:45 [dgarijo]
ok, now it is clear for me. So basically Prov container and Entity are not disjoint, but not necessarily the former subclass of the latter.
16:33:16 [stain]
and t might be misleading to say it is always an entity, because it hints that you *should* do meta-provenance in only a single way
16:34:08 [dgarijo]
16:34:26 [tlebo]
provenanceContainer: is a list of accounts, namespace definitions, and a collection of provenance assertions.
16:36:39 [stain]
so provenanceContainer() in the model is rdf:RDF (or equivalent headers) in RDF
16:36:55 [tlebo]
JSON needs ProvenanceContainer, while RDF/OWL does not need it "because it comes for free".
16:37:05 [dgarijo]
@tim: but it depends on the way you implement it: if you select named graphs, then your provenance container could be the named graphs.
16:37:20 [stain]
mm.. and then you can do RDF->model->JSON->model->RDF and somewhat at least don't mess up namespaces and stuff
16:41:14 [tlebo]
TODO: class diagram (Khalid)
16:41:25 [Luc]
how is this group proposing to model accounts?
16:41:31 [khalidbelhajjame]
16:41:33 [satya]
16:42:11 [dgarijo]
@Luc: should they be a subclass of provenance container?
16:42:30 [stain]
@Luc I think we are still thinking of that as named graph / separate OWL/RDF resources per account - due to how identifiers depends on the account in the abstract model
16:43:11 [dgarijo]
since they are a collection of provenance assertions too.
16:43:13 [Luc]
yes, probably name graph would be the way ... but then this does not show in OWL?
16:43:26 [tlebo]
stian: show the other subclasses of the extension.
16:43:39 [tlebo]
(TODO: Tim show this)
16:43:40 [khalidbelhajjame]
@Luc, yes I agree, we should be as explicit as possible
16:45:28 [dgarijo]
and what about having account as subclass of prov container? I think it could be fine.
16:46:30 [Luc]
@daniel, an account would then inherit prov container's properties ... but accounts have no namespace, and no index of accounts
16:46:49 [Paolo_]
@Daniel yes that would be reasonable -- something we discussed in the model
16:47:11 [tlebo]
the news crime file example:
16:47:41 [stain]
I would suggest to do role example with a process execution with 2 or more uses or 2 or more generations
16:47:45 [stain]
so that you see why you would want a role
16:47:51 [stain]
or 2 or more agents
16:48:21 [stain]
I have some in
16:48:49 [Luc]
i will have to go, sorry!
16:49:00 [dgarijo]
16:49:54 [satya]
ok bye Daniel
16:49:55 [satya]
16:50:06 [stain]
those notes don't match the exxmple
16:50:23 [dgarijo]
no, I wasn't leaving, just saying bye to Luc :)
16:50:36 [Zakim]
- +44.238.059.aabb
16:52:18 [satya]
oh ok :)
16:52:41 [satya]
bye Luc
16:59:00 [tlebo]
16:59:35 [tlebo]
satya: we let the conceptual model become the logical model.
17:04:10 [Zakim]
17:05:29 [Zakim]
17:09:34 [jcheney]
Got to go.
17:09:38 [Zakim]
17:09:48 [dgarijo]
see you, jcheney.
17:12:13 [Paolo_]
guys I really have to go
17:12:22 [dgarijo]
see you, paolo!
17:12:40 [Paolo_]
17:13:16 [Zakim]
17:17:50 [tlebo]
rrsagent, set log public rrsagent, draft minutes trackbot, end telcon
17:17:50 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'set log public rrsagent, draft minutes trackbot, end telcon', tlebo. Try /msg RRSAgent help
17:18:01 [tlebo]
rrsagent, set log public
17:18:09 [tlebo]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:18:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate tlebo
17:18:18 [tlebo]
trackbot, end telcon
17:18:18 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
17:18:18 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Satya_Sahoo, +1.315.330.aaaa, stain, +44.238.059.aabb
17:18:19 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:18:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
17:18:20 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
17:18:20 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items