ISSUE-258: consolidate Association / Responsibility / Affiliation
TLebo
consolidate Association / Responsibility / Affiliation
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- prov-dm
- Raised by:
- Timothy Lebo
- Opened on:
- 2012-02-22
- Description:
- Now that we have EntityInvolvement, we can cite an Agent and give it a prov:role.
Following the "Involvement design", the subject of an EntityInvolvement may be either an Entity or an Activity (or anything else, really).
I have been wrestling with confusion among Association / Responsibility / Affiliation. It has been hard to remember which _type_ of subject is used in which.
But does it matter what the subject (and its type) is? I don't think so. What matters is that we can point to an Agent, say that they were responsible (in some way), and qualify how they were responsible.
By recognizing that we don't need to distinguish among the subject types to assert responsibility, we can consolidate the concepts, involvements, and Involvements that currently make an uninteresting distinction.
Thanks,
Tim - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Fwd: Re: simplifying attribution (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-03-15)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-258 (TLebo): consolidate Association / Responsibility / Affiliation [prov-dm] (from lebot@rpi.edu on 2012-03-03)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-258 (TLebo): consolidate Association / Responsibility / Affiliation [prov-dm] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-02-24)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-216 (TLebo): qualified wasAttributedTo? [prov-dm] (from lebot@rpi.edu on 2012-02-23)
- PROV-ISSUE-258 (TLebo): consolidate Association / Responsibility / Affiliation [prov-dm] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2012-02-22)
Related notes:
No additional notes.
Display change log