edit

Provenance Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 31 May 2012

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.05.31
Seen
Curt Tilmes, Daniel Garijo, Graham Klyne, James Cheney, Luc Moreau, Paolo Missier, Paul Groth, Sam Coppens, Sandro Hawke, Satya Sahoo, Simon Miles, Stephan Zednik, Ted Thibodeau, Timothy Lebo, Tom De Nies
Regrets
James Cheney, Paolo Missier
Chair
Luc Moreau
Scribe
Tom De Nies
IRC Log
Original
Resolutions
  1. Minutes of the May 24 2012 Telecon link
Topics
  1. Admin

  2. Schedule for internal release and review

    Editors reported the following. prov-primer is ready for review. prov-dm/prov-n are ready, except for role and hasProvenanceIn currently under discussion. prov-o should be ready by mid-next week, except for role and hasProvenanceIn. There is currently no schedule for prov-constraints. We agreed that reviews will start when all issues are tackled to decide whether we go for last call. We will revisit this agenda item next week.

  3. Dublin Core Best Practice

    Kai, Daniel, and Simon have worked with Dublin Core members and produced a draft document explaining how to map some DC concepts to Prov. Tim, Paul, Satya, Stephan and Sam will review the document. Other WG members are invited to provide feedback on the document as well. The document will be transferred to the W3C infrastructure shortly.

  4. definition of role

    We discussed the property provo:hadRole (the attribute provdm:role ). The object of the discussion was the domain of this property, and the corresponding English definition. There is a preference to have a domain as broad as possible, the challenge is now to find an English definition for this notion. We didn't reach a conclusion. Graham volunteered to draft a definition. Discussion is to continue by email. In the interest of time, chairs will seek to put forward a consensus proposal.

  5. Provenance Locator (hasProvenanceIn)

    Luc summarized issues related to the proposed relation hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, [alias]). The debate seemed to converge on the question of whether we define a new qualified relation to allow optional alias. We didn't reach a conclusion either. Discussion is to continue by email. In the interest of time, chairs will seek to put forward a consensus proposal.

14:47:19 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/05/31-prov-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/05/31-prov-irc

14:47:21 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

14:47:23 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be

14:47:23 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

14:47:23 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV

Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV

14:47:24 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:47:24 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 13 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 13 minutes

14:47:24 <trackbot> Date: 31 May 2012
14:47:32 <Luc> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.05.31
14:47:44 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
14:47:54 <Luc> Scribe: Tom DeNies

(Scribe set to Tom De Nies)

14:47:59 <Luc> rrsagent, make log public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make log public

14:48:04 <Luc> zakim, who is here?

Luc Moreau: zakim, who is here?

14:48:04 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has not yet started, Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has not yet started, Luc

14:48:05 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Luc, pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see RRSAgent, Luc, pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro

14:48:17 <Luc> Regrets: James Cheney, Paolo Missier
14:50:58 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

14:51:05 <Zakim> +BrendanIAB

Zakim IRC Bot: +BrendanIAB

14:53:17 <Luc> topic: Admin

1. Admin

14:57:47 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes

Zakim IRC Bot: +Curt_Tilmes

14:58:26 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.276.aaaa

14:59:12 <Zakim> +Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc

14:59:28 <Zakim> +??P49

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P49

15:00:18 <Zakim> +TomDN

Zakim IRC Bot: +TomDN

15:00:26 <sandro> [ Luc - regrets from me for today, sorry for the late notice ]

Sandro Hawke: [ Luc - regrets from me for today, sorry for the late notice ]

15:00:33 <Zakim> +??P42

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P42

15:00:48 <Zakim> -??P42

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P42

15:00:56 <Luc> @sandro, ok, had you emailed the announcements of working drafts to various w3c lists?

Luc Moreau: @sandro, ok, had you emailed the announcements of working drafts to various w3c lists?

15:01:07 <sandro> Yes, I did.

Sandro Hawke: Yes, I did.

15:01:15 <Luc> thanks, action can be closed.

Luc Moreau: thanks, action can be closed.

15:01:18 <sandro> thanks

Sandro Hawke: thanks

15:01:27 <Zakim> +??P53

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P53

15:01:33 <Zakim> +??P54

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P54

15:01:41 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P54 is me

Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P54 is me

15:01:43 <GK> zakim, ??p53 is me

Graham Klyne: zakim, ??p53 is me

15:01:43 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it

15:01:49 <Zakim> +GK; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +GK; got it

15:02:29 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.05.31

Daniel Garijo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.05.31

15:02:48 <Luc> proposed: to approve Minutes of the May 24 2012 Telecon

PROPOSED: to approve Minutes of the May 24 2012 Telecon

15:02:55 <GK> Thanks

Graham Klyne: Thanks

15:03:00 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-05-24

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-05-24

15:03:02 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

15:03:04 <TomDN> +1

+1

15:03:04 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

15:03:09 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1

15:03:13 <Curt> +1

Curt Tilmes: +1

15:03:15 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo

15:03:18 <satya> 0 (did not attend)

Satya Sahoo: 0 (did not attend)

15:03:27 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software

Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software

15:03:34 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

15:03:34 <GK> +1

Graham Klyne: +1

15:03:36 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me

15:03:40 <Luc> resolved:  Minutes of the May 24 2012 Telecon

RESOLVED: Minutes of the May 24 2012 Telecon

15:04:03 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it

15:04:05 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted

15:04:11 <TomDN> Luc: review open actions

Luc Moreau: review open actions

15:04:15 <Zakim> +??P30

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P30

15:04:34 <TomDN> Luc: there was an action on Graham to review the constraints, and he did

Luc Moreau: there was an action on Graham to review the constraints, and he did

15:04:35 <SamCoppens> zakim, SamCoppens is with TomDN

Sam Coppens: zakim, SamCoppens is with TomDN

15:04:38 <tlebo> zakim, who is on the phone?

Timothy Lebo: zakim, who is on the phone?

15:04:41 <Luc> topic: Schedule for internal release and review

2. Schedule for internal release and review

Summary: Editors reported the following. prov-primer is ready for review. prov-dm/prov-n are ready, except for role and hasProvenanceIn currently under discussion. prov-o should be ready by mid-next week, except for role and hasProvenanceIn. There is currently no schedule for prov-constraints. We agreed that reviews will start when all issues are tackled to decide whether we go for last call. We will revisit this agenda item next week.

<Luc>Summary: Editors reported the following. prov-primer is ready for review. prov-dm/prov-n are ready, except for role and hasProvenanceIn currently under discussion. prov-o should be ready by mid-next week, except for role and hasProvenanceIn. There is currently no schedule for prov-constraints. We agreed that reviews will start when all issues are tackled to decide whether we go for last call.  We will revisit this agenda item next week.
15:04:57 <Zakim> +SamCoppens; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SamCoppens; got it

15:04:58 <TomDN> Luc: all other open actions closed as well

Luc Moreau: all other open actions closed as well

15:04:59 <Zakim> On the phone I see BrendanIAB, Curt_Tilmes, +1.518.276.aaaa, Luc, ??P49, TomDN, GK, dgarijo, Satya_Sahoo, MacTed (muted), BrendanIAB.a, ??P30

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see BrendanIAB, Curt_Tilmes, +1.518.276.aaaa, Luc, ??P49, TomDN, GK, dgarijo, Satya_Sahoo, MacTed (muted), BrendanIAB.a, ??P30

15:05:02 <Zakim> TomDN has TomDN, SamCoppens

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN has TomDN, SamCoppens

15:05:06 <tlebo> zakim, I am aaaa

Timothy Lebo: zakim, I am aaaa

15:05:17 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo; got it

15:05:22 <TomDN> Luc: we need to agree on the time when  the documents can be released for review, and for how long

Luc Moreau: we need to agree on the time when the documents can be released for review, and for how long

15:05:50 <TomDN> ... there are still 2 open issues

... there are still 2 open issues

15:06:04 <TomDN> ... on the agenda today to close them

... on the agenda today to close them

15:06:23 <TomDN> ... but release of documents would not be held up by these issues

... but release of documents would not be held up by these issues

15:06:37 <TomDN> ... It is unclear when the CONSTRAINTS document would be ready for review

... It is unclear when the CONSTRAINTS document would be ready for review

15:06:54 <TomDN> SimonM: prov-primer is ready for review

Simon Miles: prov-primer is ready for review

15:07:13 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:07:15 <TomDN> Luc: prov-o?

Luc Moreau: prov-o?

15:07:30 <TomDN> tlebo: About a dozen issues in the tracker

Timothy Lebo: About a dozen issues in the tracker

15:08:18 <TomDN> ... most important issues is hasprovenancein and dictionary

... most important issues is hasprovenancein and dictionary

15:08:33 <TomDN> ... most others are editorial issues and shouldn't pose many problems

... most others are editorial issues and shouldn't pose many problems

15:08:44 <TomDN> Luc: When would the document be ready for review then?

Luc Moreau: When would the document be ready for review then?

15:08:54 <TomDN> tlebo: Could be by early next week

Timothy Lebo: Could be by early next week

15:09:15 <Zakim> +??P2

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2

15:09:20 <TomDN> ... except hasProvenanceIn

... except hasProvenanceIn

15:09:24 <GK> If PAQ terminology is part of hasPriovenanceIn discussion, I'd move to put it in a separate namespace ... if only to keep the issues distinct in our discussion.

Graham Klyne: If PAQ terminology is part of hasPriovenanceIn discussion, I'd move to put it in a separate namespace ... if only to keep the issues distinct in our discussion.

15:09:44 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:09:44 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:09:49 <TomDN> Luc: Should we wait until these issues are resolved, or proceed with review?

Luc Moreau: Should we wait until these issues are resolved, or proceed with review?

15:10:23 <TomDN> Paul: It would be nice to have reviewers take a look at it before the last call

Paul Groth: It would be nice to have reviewers take a look at it before the last call

15:10:49 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

15:11:02 <tlebo> +1, would be nice to have reviewers be for "Last Call" (for real)

Timothy Lebo: +1, would be nice to have reviewers be for "Last Call" (for real)

15:11:14 <TomDN> ... We already released something recently, so there is no real pressure to release something right now. It would be better to wait until everyone agrees that the document is ready for last call

... We already released something recently, so there is no real pressure to release something right now. It would be better to wait until everyone agrees that the document is ready for last call

15:11:17 <pgroth> yes

Paul Groth: yes

15:11:23 <dgarijo> i think so, yes

Daniel Garijo: i think so, yes

15:11:31 <TomDN> Luc: Should we postpone this to next telecon?

Luc Moreau: Should we postpone this to next telecon?

15:11:34 <GK> I shall miss the next two teleconferences .. travelling, meetings, etc.

Graham Klyne: I shall miss the next two teleconferences .. travelling, meetings, etc.

15:11:50 <Luc> topic: Dublin Core Best Practice

3. Dublin Core Best Practice

Summary: Kai, Daniel, and Simon have worked with Dublin Core members and produced a draft document explaining how to map some DC concepts to Prov. Tim, Paul, Satya, Stephan and Sam will review the document. Other WG members are invited to provide feedback on the document as well. The document will be transferred to the W3C infrastructure shortly.

<luc>Summary: Kai, Daniel, and Simon have worked with Dublin Core members  and produced a draft document explaining how to map some DC concepts to Prov. Tim, Paul, Satya, Stephan and Sam will review the document. Other WG members are invited to provide feedback on the document as well.  The document will be transferred to the W3C infrastructure shortly.
15:11:50 <TomDN> ... By then we will have agreed on outstanding issues.

... By then we will have agreed on outstanding issues.

15:12:19 <dgarijo> https://github.com/dcmi/DC-PROV-Mapping/wiki/Mapping-Primer

Daniel Garijo: https://github.com/dcmi/DC-PROV-Mapping/wiki/Mapping-Primer

15:12:25 <TomDN> danielG: I have sent an email this morning with the mapping links

Daniel Garijo: I have sent an email this morning with the mapping links

15:13:47 <TomDN> ... We have divided the mapping in a primer, a specialization of prov-o, a direct mappings doc and finally, a complex mappings doc

... We have divided the mapping in a primer, a specialization of prov-o, a direct mappings doc and finally, a complex mappings doc

15:14:04 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:14:07 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:14:15 <TomDN> ... next steps are to complete the round trip

... next steps are to complete the round trip

15:14:38 <Zakim> +??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13

15:14:39 <GK> OCLC?

Graham Klyne: OCLC?

15:14:58 <TomDN> didn't hear the question properly, sorry

didn't hear the question properly, sorry

15:15:09 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me

Zakim, mute me

15:15:09 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should now be muted

15:15:15 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:15:18 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg

15:15:18 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

15:15:31 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:15:41 <TomDN> danielG: if we have more problems, we will move it to the W3C wiki

Daniel Garijo: if we have more problems, we will move it to the W3C wiki

15:16:17 <TomDN> Luc: I think it is important that we move this document to the W3C website (for intellectual property reasons)

Luc Moreau: I think it is important that we move this document to the W3C website (for intellectual property reasons)

15:16:44 <TomDN> ... My suggestion is: move to wiki (or most appropriate location)

... My suggestion is: move to wiki (or most appropriate location)

15:16:51 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:16:51 <TomDN> danielG: OK, will do this

Daniel Garijo: OK, will do this

15:17:10 <TomDN> Luc: Who would be willing to review the DC mapping document?

Luc Moreau: Who would be willing to review the DC mapping document?

15:17:16 <tlebo> I'll try.

Timothy Lebo: I'll try.

15:17:17 <dgarijo> It is not very long i promise :)

Daniel Garijo: It is not very long i promise :)

15:17:20 <pgroth> +1

Paul Groth: +1

15:17:31 <satya> +1

Satya Sahoo: +1

15:17:33 <zednik> +1

Stephan Zednik: +1

15:17:34 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1

15:17:43 <dgarijo> thanks to all.

Daniel Garijo: thanks to all.

15:18:10 <Luc> topic: definition of role

4. definition of role

Summary: We discussed the property provo:hadRole (the attribute provdm:role ). The object of the discussion was the domain of this property, and the corresponding English definition. There is a preference to have a domain as broad as possible, the challenge is now to find an English definition for this notion. We didn't reach a conclusion. Graham volunteered to draft a definition. Discussion is to continue by email. In the interest of time, chairs will seek to put forward a consensus proposal.

<luc>Summary: We discussed the property provo:hadRole (the attribute provdm:role ). The  object of the discussion was the domain of this property, and the corresponding English definition. There is a preference to have a domain as broad as possible, the challenge is now to find an English definition for this notion.  We didn't reach a conclusion. Graham volunteered to draft a definition. Discussion is to continue by email. In the interest of time, chairs will seek to put forward a consensus proposal.
15:18:19 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/384

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/384

15:18:25 <TomDN> Luc: thanks to Daniel for putting the effort into this document, it is great that we can connect to the Dublin Core community

Luc Moreau: thanks to Daniel for putting the effort into this document, it is great that we can connect to the Dublin Core community

15:18:38 <GK> The documet looks good to me on cursory glance.  Exposes and analyses issues nicely

Graham Klyne: The documet looks good to me on cursory glance. Exposes and analyses issues nicely

15:19:29 <TomDN> Luc: As I was reviewing the PROV-DM, I came across this issue http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/384

Luc Moreau: As I was reviewing the PROV-DM, I came across this issue http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/384

15:19:48 <TomDN> ... The challenge is getting the right definition for the DM

... The challenge is getting the right definition for the DM

15:20:20 <TomDN> Luc: Suggestions are welcome.

Luc Moreau: Suggestions are welcome.

15:20:25 <tlebo> q+ to respond to role

Timothy Lebo: q+ to respond to role

15:21:06 <TomDN> GK: my initial inclination here is consistence with the DM

Graham Klyne: my initial inclination here is consistence with the DM

15:21:41 <TomDN> ... It is difficult to find a definition that is both technically correct, and suits all the intuitions

... It is difficult to find a definition that is both technically correct, and suits all the intuitions

15:22:21 <TomDN> ... I would be inclined to choose the technical definition, and then provide further illustration

... I would be inclined to choose the technical definition, and then provide further illustration

15:23:15 <TomDN> GK: All of these roles are subtle variations of existing relations of the DM

Graham Klyne: All of these roles are subtle variations of existing relations of the DM

15:23:26 <TomDN> Luc: is the word "role" appropriate?

Luc Moreau: is the word "role" appropriate?

15:23:40 <TomDN> GK: In many cases, yes.

Graham Klyne: In many cases, yes.

15:23:48 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:23:56 <TomDN> ... In most of the useful cases, it fits.

... In most of the useful cases, it fits.

15:24:16 <TomDN> ... It invokes intuition, without being too committing

... It invokes intuition, without being too committing

15:24:28 <TomDN> Tim: I have some comments

Timothy Lebo: I have some comments

15:24:38 <TomDN> ... I'd rather try to keep it broad.

... I'd rather try to keep it broad.

15:24:54 <TomDN> ... and avoid constraining it too much, to where it can be used.

... and avoid constraining it too much, to where it can be used.

15:25:39 <tlebo> * prefer to keep it broad - avoid pinning down and constraining where it can be used.

Timothy Lebo: * prefer to keep it broad - avoid pinning down and constraining where it can be used.

15:25:44 <tlebo> * having role on Involvement seems to make sense.

Timothy Lebo: * having role on Involvement seems to make sense.

15:25:48 <tlebo> * the name of the role should prefer the "object" instead the "subject" (it's the role of the prov:involvee)

Timothy Lebo: * the name of the role should prefer the "object" instead the "subject" (it's the role of the prov:involvee)

15:25:52 <TomDN> thanks :)

thanks :)

15:26:07 <TomDN> Luc: Not sure it works.

Luc Moreau: Not sure it works.

15:26:40 <TomDN> ... In some cases the role applies to the subject, in others to the object. For example in usage-generation

... In some cases the role applies to the subject, in others to the object. For example in usage-generation

15:27:00 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:27:04 <GK> But isn't the role a *relation*, applying to the combination of subject *and* object?

Graham Klyne: But isn't the role a *relation*, applying to the combination of subject *and* object?

15:27:04 <tlebo> q-

Timothy Lebo: q-

15:27:19 <TomDN> ... Finding something that is intuitive for the user is the point, and maybe "role" is not the right word.

... Finding something that is intuitive for the user is the point, and maybe "role" is not the right word.

15:27:32 <TomDN> Paul: I wouldn't go with over-specification

Paul Groth: I wouldn't go with over-specification

15:27:41 <GK> @paul +1

Graham Klyne: @paul +1

15:28:21 <TomDN> ... We want to provide syntax for people to use when describing their provenance. I don't know if further specifying "role" would affect the semantics much.

... We want to provide syntax for people to use when describing their provenance. I don't know if further specifying "role" would affect the semantics much.

15:28:33 <TomDN> ... Better to wait to see how it will be used.

... Better to wait to see how it will be used.

15:28:48 <tlebo> @paul, but concerned about the "subject vs. object" of swapping - can lead to confusion.

Timothy Lebo: @paul, but concerned about the "subject vs. object" of swapping - can lead to confusion.

15:28:48 <MacTed> q+

Ted Thibodeau: q+

15:28:52 <Luc> a role is the function of an entity, agent, or activity with respect to another entity, agent, or activity

Luc Moreau: a role is the function of an entity, agent, or activity with respect to another entity, agent, or activity

15:28:56 <TomDN> Luc: I just want to find a good English definition

Luc Moreau: I just want to find a good English definition

15:28:57 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me

15:28:57 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted

15:29:05 <GK> I would offer to provide some word, but I have very limited time in the next two weeks.

Graham Klyne: I would offer to provide some word, but I have very limited time in the next two weeks.

15:29:06 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

15:29:46 <TomDN> MacTed: My sense of "role" in this space is that there are some primitives which that some entity may be acting as

Ted Thibodeau: My sense of "role" in this space is that there are some primitives which that some entity may be acting as

15:29:53 <TomDN> ... in a provenance description

... in a provenance description

15:30:15 <TomDN> ... An entity is acting as an entity in a defined process

... An entity is acting as an entity in a defined process

15:30:22 <Luc> @macted, current definition is:  A role is the function of an entity or an agent with respect to an activity

Luc Moreau: @macted, current definition is: A role is the function of an entity or an agent with respect to an activity

15:30:43 <TomDN> ... I don't think that people will use this kind of terminology

... I don't think that people will use this kind of terminology

15:30:52 <GK> @macted ... actually one place where roles do come up is in inputs to workflow elements, which ism exactly like divisor, etc.

Graham Klyne: @macted ... actually one place where roles do come up is in inputs to workflow elements, which ism exactly like divisor, etc.

15:31:02 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:31:03 <tlebo> so @macted just wants agents to be able to have roles, and not entities?

Timothy Lebo: so @macted just wants agents to be able to have roles, and not entities?

15:31:05 <Luc> ack macted

Luc Moreau: ack macted

15:31:26 <TomDN> GK: One of the areas where roles are important in is workflow provenance

Graham Klyne: One of the areas where roles are important in is workflow provenance

15:31:42 <tlebo> @gk, yes, role = input and role = parameters is useful to describe the Entity's Usage in an Activity.

Timothy Lebo: @gk, yes, role = input and role = parameters is useful to describe the Entity's Usage in an Activity.

15:32:03 <TomDN> ... This is exactly the place where the object-subject problem is posed

... This is exactly the place where the object-subject problem is posed

15:32:13 <pgroth> yes

Paul Groth: yes

15:32:15 <Luc> @macted, current definition is:  A role is the function of an entity or an agent with respect to an activity

Luc Moreau: @macted, current definition is: A role is the function of an entity or an agent with respect to an activity

15:33:08 <TomDN> Luc: in the model, we have relations that don't mention an activity

Luc Moreau: in the model, we have relations that don't mention an activity

15:33:39 <TomDN> Luc: Do we go for the current definition, or with a broader domain? (but no definition yet)

Luc Moreau: Do we go for the current definition, or with a broader domain? (but no definition yet)

15:33:40 <satya> But, why is role only applicable in context of activity

Satya Sahoo: But, why is role only applicable in context of activity

15:33:56 <TomDN> MacTed: examples of these relations?

Ted Thibodeau: examples of these relations?

15:34:03 <tlebo> thats meta-provenance, @macted.

Timothy Lebo: thats meta-provenance, @macted.

15:34:03 <TomDN> Luc: Attribution for example

Luc Moreau: Attribution for example

15:34:16 <TomDN> ... Derivation

... Derivation

15:34:44 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:35:30 <TomDN> Luc: We have a choice. Either decide what the domain is and work out a definition. or take the definition and adapt the domain to fit it

Luc Moreau: We have a choice. Either decide what the domain is and work out a definition. or take the definition and adapt the domain to fit it

15:35:35 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:35:50 <TomDN> ... What would people prefer?

... What would people prefer?

15:36:25 <TomDN> pgroth: Its hard to define, but maybe we can get around it by being more open

Paul Groth: Its hard to define, but maybe we can get around it by being more open

15:36:35 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:36:38 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg

15:36:45 <TomDN> GK: Broadly, I agree with Paul.

Graham Klyne: Broadly, I agree with Paul.

15:37:25 <TomDN> ... Would like to take a shot at a definition, but will be travelling the next week, so it is possible that I don;t have the time

... Would like to take a shot at a definition, but will be travelling the next week, so it is possible that I don;t have the time

15:38:17 <TomDN> Luc: Let's do that. We make the domain as unrestricted as possible. and try to work out a definition

Luc Moreau: Let's do that. We make the domain as unrestricted as possible. and try to work out a definition

15:38:18 <Luc> topic: Provenance Locator (hasProvenanceIn)

5. Provenance Locator (hasProvenanceIn)

Summary: Luc summarized issues related to the proposed relation hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, [alias]). The debate seemed to converge on the question of whether we define a new qualified relation to allow optional alias. We didn't reach a conclusion either. Discussion is to continue by email. In the interest of time, chairs will seek to put forward a consensus proposal.

<Luc>Summary: Luc summarized issues related to the proposed relation hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, [alias]). The debate seemed to converge on the question of whether we define a new qualified relation to allow optional alias.  We didn't reach a conclusion either. Discussion is to continue by email. In the interest of time, chairs will seek to put forward a consensus proposal.
15:38:29 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceLocator

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceLocator

15:38:41 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/385

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/385

15:38:54 <TomDN> Luc: I drafted a summary of the issue on the wiki (see link above)

Luc Moreau: I drafted a summary of the issue on the wiki (see link above)

15:38:55 <tlebo> FWIW, what about making prov:oHadRole and prov:sHadRole to distinguish between talking about the subject or object of the Involvement?

Timothy Lebo: FWIW, what about making prov:oHadRole and prov:sHadRole to distinguish between talking about the subject or object of the Involvement?

15:39:12 <tlebo> \ prov: sHadRole and prov:o HadRole

Timothy Lebo: \ prov: sHadRole and prov:o HadRole

15:39:29 <tlebo> \ prov:    oHadRole

Timothy Lebo: \ prov: oHadRole

15:39:36 <TomDN> ... It is important to be able to navigate the distributed graph structure we create using the PROV-DM

... It is important to be able to navigate the distributed graph structure we create using the PROV-DM

15:39:46 <Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/releases/ED-prov-dm-20120525/prov-dm.html#term-hasProvenanceIn

Luc Moreau: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/releases/ED-prov-dm-20120525/prov-dm.html#term-hasProvenanceIn

15:39:55 <Luc> hasProvenanceIn(id, subject, bundle, target, attrs),

Luc Moreau: hasProvenanceIn(id, subject, bundle, target, attrs),

15:40:06 <MacTed> (not past tense?)

Ted Thibodeau: (not past tense?)

15:40:48 <TomDN> ... With this relation, we are sayign that a given subject has some provenance in a bundle, and the target is an alias that is known under a different name in the bundle

... With this relation, we are sayign that a given subject has some provenance in a bundle, and the target is an alias that is known under a different name in the bundle

15:41:03 <TomDN> ... The issue was raised that this is too complicated.

... The issue was raised that this is too complicated.

15:41:15 <dgarijo> @MacTed: good point, but it is referring to where the provenance IS located, not where it was located.

Daniel Garijo: @MacTed: good point, but it is referring to where the provenance IS located, not where it was located.

15:41:16 <Luc>   hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle)

Luc Moreau: hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle)

15:41:29 <TomDN> Luc: It was then suggested to simplify to above

Luc Moreau: It was then suggested to simplify to above

15:41:50 <tlebo> "shock" sioc

Timothy Lebo: "shock" sioc

15:42:06 <Luc>      hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, alias)

Luc Moreau: hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, alias)

15:42:15 <TomDN> ... there are some precedents in literature for this kind of relation

... there are some precedents in literature for this kind of relation

15:42:35 <TomDN> ... Target may be better understood as alias (see above)

... Target may be better understood as alias (see above)

15:42:40 <Luc>       hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle)

Luc Moreau: hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle)

15:42:46 <Luc>       alternateOf(subject,  alias)

Luc Moreau: alternateOf(subject, alias)

15:42:46 <tlebo> +1 to "alias" instead of "target-uri"

Timothy Lebo: +1 to "alias" instead of "target-uri"

15:43:03 <TomDN> ... It was suggested that 2 binary relations might be better than 1 ternary

... It was suggested that 2 binary relations might be better than 1 ternary

15:43:49 <TomDN> ... There was a comment made that it still not precise enough, and it isn't clear what the alias is in the bundle

... There was a comment made that it still not precise enough, and it isn't clear what the alias is in the bundle

15:43:51 <Luc>      hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, alias, [prov:type="..."])

Luc Moreau: hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, alias, [prov:type="..."])

15:43:56 <GK> q+ to comment on not knowing what to look for in the bundle...

Graham Klyne: q+ to comment on not knowing what to look for in the bundle...

15:44:25 <tlebo> @luc @gk, you look up "any" of the alternateOfs?

Timothy Lebo: @luc @gk, you look up "any" of the alternateOfs?

15:44:28 <Luc>      hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, alias)

Luc Moreau: hasProvenanceIn(subject, bundle, alias)

15:44:43 <GK> @tlebo yes!

Graham Klyne: @tlebo yes!

15:44:53 <TomDN> ... When we talk about the alias, we refer to a name, not a resource

... When we talk about the alias, we refer to a name, not a resource

15:44:54 <smiles> @tlebo agreed

Simon Miles: @tlebo agreed

15:44:59 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:45:05 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

15:45:50 <TomDN> GK: In response to issue that it doesn;t help with navigation: you would look for all of them

Graham Klyne: In response to issue that it doesn;t help with navigation: you would look for all of them

15:45:56 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

15:45:56 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to comment on not knowing what to look for in the bundle...

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to comment on not knowing what to look for in the bundle...

15:46:45 <TomDN> SimonM: Replacing the target with alternateOf is depending on how the entities are related

Simon Miles: Replacing the target with alternateOf is depending on how the entities are related

15:46:58 <TomDN> ... which is important

... which is important

15:47:18 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:47:22 <tlebo> FWIW, I think I proposed hasProvenanceIn() can decompose into prov:isTopicOf, prov:alternateOf, and prov:atLocation

Timothy Lebo: FWIW, I think I proposed hasProvenanceIn() can decompose into prov:isTopicOf, prov:alternateOf, and prov:atLocation

15:47:30 <TomDN> ... Even if you have the alias in hasProvenanceIn, you should still have the alternateOf relation

... Even if you have the alias in hasProvenanceIn, you should still have the alternateOf relation

15:47:33 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:47:34 <GK> q+ to ask my broader question: why do we need aliases at all?

Graham Klyne: q+ to ask my broader question: why do we need aliases at all?

15:47:36 <TomDN> (or specializationOf)

(or specializationOf)

15:47:38 <Luc> ack smi

Luc Moreau: ack smi

15:48:02 <TomDN> pgroth: Aren't we trying to put too much into this hasProvenanceIn?

Paul Groth: Aren't we trying to put too much into this hasProvenanceIn?

15:48:15 <MacTed> \ owl:sameAs serves the purpose of saying joe:thing1 and fred:thing2 are aliases for the same entity

Ted Thibodeau: \ owl:sameAs serves the purpose of saying joe:thing1 and fred:thing2 are aliases for the same entity

15:48:16 <TomDN> ... simpler would be: look in this bundle.

... simpler would be: look in this bundle.

15:48:21 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

15:48:25 <tlebo> q+ to say that the only new thing that hasProvenanceIn offers is prov:isTopicOf, so we should reduce it to just that.

Timothy Lebo: q+ to say that the only new thing that hasProvenanceIn offers is prov:isTopicOf, so we should reduce it to just that.

15:48:40 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

15:48:40 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask my broader question: why do we need aliases at all?

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask my broader question: why do we need aliases at all?

15:49:04 <TomDN> GK: My broader issue is that the requirement is to be able to navigate a distributed graph. The hasProvenanceIn is suitable for this

Graham Klyne: My broader issue is that the requirement is to be able to navigate a distributed graph. The hasProvenanceIn is suitable for this

15:49:14 <pgroth> are main purpose is to do provenance of provenance

Paul Groth: are main purpose is to do provenance of provenance

15:49:16 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:49:18 <pgroth> which is why we need bundles

Paul Groth: which is why we need bundles

15:49:24 <TomDN> ... The stuff that is being added is causing more confusion than adding useful properties.

... The stuff that is being added is causing more confusion than adding useful properties.

15:49:28 <pgroth> and thus hasProvenanceIn

Paul Groth: and thus hasProvenanceIn

15:49:40 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:50:00 <tlebo> I think I proposed hasProvenanceIn() can decompose into prov:isTopicOf, prov:alternateOf, and prov:atLocation

Timothy Lebo: I think I proposed hasProvenanceIn() can decompose into prov:isTopicOf, prov:alternateOf, and prov:atLocation

15:50:15 <TomDN> tlebo: I think that hasProvenanceIn can be composed into a new istopicOf relation and alternateOf that we already have

Timothy Lebo: I think that hasProvenanceIn can be composed into a new istopicOf relation and alternateOf that we already have

15:50:22 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:50:26 <tlebo> the only new thing that hasProvenanceIn offers is prov:isTopicOf, so we should reduce it to just that.

Timothy Lebo: the only new thing that hasProvenanceIn offers is prov:isTopicOf, so we should reduce it to just that.

15:50:26 <Luc> ack tlebo

Luc Moreau: ack tlebo

15:50:26 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to say that the only new thing that hasProvenanceIn offers is prov:isTopicOf, so we should reduce it to just that.

Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to say that the only new thing that hasProvenanceIn offers is prov:isTopicOf, so we should reduce it to just that.

15:50:31 <TomDN> ... It might be better to reuse the thing we already have.

... It might be better to reuse the thing we already have.

15:50:43 <dgarijo> @Tim: http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_primaryTopic?

Daniel Garijo: @Tim: http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_primaryTopic?

15:51:04 <tlebo> @dgarijo, need to relax the "primary-ness"

Timothy Lebo: @dgarijo, need to relax the "primary-ness"

15:51:25 <tlebo> if foaf:primaryTopic had a superproperty foaf:topic, then yes.

Timothy Lebo: if foaf:primaryTopic had a superproperty foaf:topic, then yes.

15:51:30 <GK> SO why not just use the same name?

Graham Klyne: SO why not just use the same name?

15:51:33 <TomDN> Luc: I think that having to search the entire bundle when looking for an alias is not a good solution.

Luc Moreau: I think that having to search the entire bundle when looking for an alias is not a good solution.

15:51:42 <MacTed> +1 GK

Ted Thibodeau: +1 GK

15:51:45 <tlebo> @gk @who?

Timothy Lebo: @gk @who?

15:51:47 <TomDN> ... When you assert provenance, you want to release your bundles fast

... When you assert provenance, you want to release your bundles fast

15:51:55 <TomDN> ... but also connect them properly.

... but also connect them properly.

15:52:05 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's here?

15:52:05 <Zakim> On the phone I see BrendanIAB, Curt_Tilmes, tlebo, Luc, ??P49, TomDN (muted), GK, dgarijo, Satya_Sahoo, MacTed, BrendanIAB.a, ??P30, ??P2, ??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see BrendanIAB, Curt_Tilmes, tlebo, Luc, ??P49, TomDN (muted), GK, dgarijo, Satya_Sahoo, MacTed, BrendanIAB.a, ??P30, ??P2, ??P13

15:52:08 <Zakim> TomDN has TomDN, SamCoppens

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN has TomDN, SamCoppens

15:52:08 <Zakim> On IRC I see stephenc, Christine, dcorsar, tlebo, zednik, SamCoppens, satya, dgarijo, TomDN, smiles, GK, GK_, Curt, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see stephenc, Christine, dcorsar, tlebo, zednik, SamCoppens, satya, dgarijo, TomDN, smiles, GK, GK_, Curt, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro

15:52:09 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:52:12 <TomDN> ... and currently we have no suitable mechanism for this

... and currently we have no suitable mechanism for this

15:52:33 <MacTed> q+

Ted Thibodeau: q+

15:52:40 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

15:52:52 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:52:59 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:53:12 <tlebo> @gk, waht about "using same name"?

Timothy Lebo: @gk, waht about "using same name"?

15:53:20 <TomDN> ... The challenge is that you can't just extend an existing relation with an alias, since it is binary

... The challenge is that you can't just extend an existing relation with an alias, since it is binary

15:53:36 <GK> @tlebo didn't I just say that? :)

Graham Klyne: @tlebo didn't I just say that? :)

15:53:39 <TomDN> Macted: this problem is inherent to a distributed graph

Ted Thibodeau: this problem is inherent to a distributed graph

15:53:46 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:53:49 <tlebo> @gk, yes, but what are you saying?

Timothy Lebo: @gk, yes, but what are you saying?

15:53:50 <Luc> ack mact

Luc Moreau: ack mact

15:53:55 <TomDN> ... At some point asserters will assert in the wrong way.

... At some point asserters will assert in the wrong way.

15:54:08 <pgroth> i think I have a nice way out

Paul Groth: i think I have a nice way out

15:54:08 <TomDN> ... We can't stop that.

... We can't stop that.

15:54:18 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:54:34 <GK> Ah, ... I mean use the same name when referring to the same thing.  URIs are, after all, a global namespace.

Graham Klyne: Ah, ... I mean use the same name when referring to the same thing. URIs are, after all, a global namespace.

15:54:50 <GK> So use the same name in different budles.

Graham Klyne: So use the same name in different budles.

15:55:05 <tlebo> @gk, ok, so you're not referring to my proposed name of isTopicOf ?

Timothy Lebo: @gk, ok, so you're not referring to my proposed name of isTopicOf ?

15:55:14 <TomDN> pgroth: A way around this is: we have hasProvenanceIn, but we allow it to be extended

Paul Groth: A way around this is: we have hasProvenanceIn, but we allow it to be extended

15:55:57 <TomDN> Luc: this is a possibility. It would imply that you need a qualified relation for it. But the idea seems to be that we don;t want that.

Luc Moreau: this is a possibility. It would imply that you need a qualified relation for it. But the idea seems to be that we don;t want that.

15:56:03 <tlebo> why do we need a qualified relation on this?

Timothy Lebo: why do we need a qualified relation on this?

15:56:11 <pgroth> for extension

Paul Groth: for extension

15:56:12 <GK> @tlebo ... not sure.  I haven't really studied that - or is it just a name change?

Graham Klyne: @tlebo ... not sure. I haven't really studied that - or is it just a name change?

15:56:21 <tlebo> gimmie isTopicOf and we're done.

Timothy Lebo: gimmie isTopicOf and we're done.

15:56:28 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:56:31 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:56:33 <pgroth> gotta go, sorry

Paul Groth: gotta go, sorry

15:56:41 <tlebo> @gk, no, it's a rename and reduction to hasProvnenaceIn - alternateOf - atLocation.

Timothy Lebo: @gk, no, it's a rename and reduction to hasProvnenaceIn - alternateOf - atLocation.

15:57:05 <tlebo> q+ to say qualifying this property seems like overkill.

Timothy Lebo: q+ to say qualifying this property seems like overkill.

15:57:12 <Luc> ack pgr

Luc Moreau: ack pgr

15:57:33 <TomDN_> (connection dropped out)

(connection dropped out)

15:57:53 <TomDN_> GK: I don't see why would need really this alias mechanism

Graham Klyne: I don't see why would need really this alias mechanism

15:58:22 <tlebo> so luc's problem is linking to "already created" bundles?

Timothy Lebo: so luc's problem is linking two "already created" bundles?

15:58:32 <tlebo> s/to/two/
15:58:55 <TomDN_> satya: my concern is that it is a very narrow scenario.  I'm not sure we as a WG should meddle in thi

Satya Sahoo: my concern is that it is a very narrow scenario. I'm not sure we as a WG should meddle in thi

15:59:10 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:59:13 <Luc> ack sat

Luc Moreau: ack sat

15:59:19 <TomDN> satya: we should avoid making the model overcomplicated

Satya Sahoo: we should avoid making the model overcomplicated

16:00:27 <TomDN> tlebo: If we reduce hasProvenanceIn to hasTopicOf it would solve this problem

Timothy Lebo: If we reduce hasProvenanceIn to hasTopicOf it would solve this problem

16:00:36 <TomDN> Luc: the problem is aliasing

Luc Moreau: the problem is aliasing

16:00:54 <TomDN> tlebo: When you change the id, use alternateOf

Timothy Lebo: When you change the id, use alternateOf

16:01:15 <TomDN> Luc: then you would end up looking for all alternateOf relations, which is unfortunate

Luc Moreau: then you would end up looking for all alternateOf relations, which is unfortunate

16:01:57 <GK> It seems to me that this whole issue is being motivated by implementation concerns, when what we are defining here is a data model.  Premature optimization ... and all that.

Graham Klyne: It seems to me that this whole issue is being motivated by implementation concerns, when what we are defining here is a data model. Premature optimization ... and all that.

16:01:59 <TomDN> ... Then you could en up with multiple specializations for the same agent in one bundle

... Thend you could end up with multiple specializations for the same agendt in one bundle

16:02:03 <MacTed> +1 GK

Ted Thibodeau: +1 GK

16:02:05 <TomDN> s/en/end
16:02:21 <tlebo> q?

Timothy Lebo: q?

16:02:23 <tlebo> q-

Timothy Lebo: q-

16:02:34 <TomDN> Luc: we will continue this discussion via email

Luc Moreau: we will continue this discussion via email

16:02:47 <tlebo> thanks!

Timothy Lebo: thanks!

16:02:51 <Zakim> -??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P13

16:02:52 <Zakim> -??P2

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P2

16:02:53 <Zakim> -??P49

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P49

16:02:55 <GK> I am feeling inclined to appeal to the decisoioin from the last F2F -- lacking consensus, drop it.

Graham Klyne: I am feeling inclined to appeal to the decisoioin from the last F2F -- lacking consensus, drop it.

16:02:56 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo

16:02:59 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo

16:03:03 <Zakim> -Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc

16:03:05 <Zakim> -dgarijo

Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo

16:03:08 <Zakim> -MacTed

Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed

16:03:11 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes

Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt_Tilmes

16:03:13 <Zakim> -??P30

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P30

16:03:15 <Zakim> -TomDN

Zakim IRC Bot: -TomDN

16:03:19 <Zakim> -GK

Zakim IRC Bot: -GK

16:03:22 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended

16:03:23 <Zakim> Attendees were BrendanIAB, Curt_Tilmes, +1.518.276.aaaa, Luc, TomDN, dgarijo, GK, Satya_Sahoo, MacTed, SamCoppens, tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were BrendanIAB, Curt_Tilmes, +1.518.276.aaaa, Luc, TomDN, dgarijo, GK, Satya_Sahoo, MacTed, SamCoppens, tlebo



Formatted by CommonScribe