ISSUE-233: If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq?
paq-dm-and-accounts?
If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq?
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Accessing and Querying Provenance
- Raised by:
- Luc Moreau
- Opened on:
- 2012-02-05
- Description:
- I am raising this issue against the paq, but really, this is a paq/dm issue.
At F2F2, we have decided to simplify PROV-DM, by dropping the notion of AccountRecord from the data model. It should simplify the DM since we no longer have this notion of scope, which was challenging.
I anticipate the prov-DM will now say that it assumes the existence of a mechanism (outside the PROV-DM) by which bundles of records/assertions can be given a name.
The PR0V-DM used to offer a RecordContainer and the ability to package up accounts in such containers, such that multiple accounts could be returned when retrieving provenance for an entity-uri. A client was then able to sift through the container, and find whatever it was looking for, possibly multiple entity records for entity-uri in various accounts. All that was possible without having to discuss accounts in the PAQ document.
Now, this facility has gone.
So the question is: how do we find what is being said about a given entity-uris in multiple "bundles/accounts"?
PS. At F2F2 meeting, we discuss the requirement to support the provenance of provenance. I think we also have to record multiple accounts of what happened to an entity (even by a same provider!).
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- addressing issues in prov-aq (from p.t.groth@vu.nl on 2012-04-05)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from Graham.Klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2012-02-08)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-02-08)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from Graham.Klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2012-02-08)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-02-08)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from Graham.Klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2012-02-08)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from p.t.groth@vu.nl on 2012-02-07)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk on 2012-02-07)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk on 2012-02-07)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-02-07)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-02-06)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2012-02-06)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-02-06)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from GK@ninebynine.org on 2012-02-06)
- PROV-ISSUE-233 (paq-dm-and-accounts?): If not in DM, should there be some form of account support in the paq? [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2012-02-05)
Related notes:
The provenance service elements have been updated, and I think the changes don't fundamentally change anything. I don't think there's any value in adding anything more about "bundles" (what were "accounts"), so I propose (again) to close this issue as "wontfix".
Graham Klyne, 6 Nov 2012, 14:50:05Per further discussions at the face-to-face in November 2012...
The PROV-AQ spec is specifically about finding the provenance of a resource, not about dereferencing other resources like bundles. As such, this requirement is out of scope for PROV-AQ.
There does remain an question: given the URI of a provenance bundle, what do you get by dereferencing it, or how do you access the contents of the bundle?
Display change log