RE: updates to PAQ doc for discussion

Luc,
If my IPAW paper is on the web with a URL, why isn't that resource an "identified characterized thing"? Are you saying that I must create another ID for a pil:entity that is an assertion about that paper before I can record its provenance? Or are you just arguing that because entities are assertions, an asserter can make them up, i.e. a characterization that is most useful for provenance may not be one that is already identified as a resource?

I guess I'm looking for the practical impact - are you arguing that we always have a layer of indirection when recording provenance of an existing resource, or are you arguing something more subtle - use of a resource URL in pil as an entity is an assertion that the resource is characterized in a way that is suitable for the provenance being recorded (i.e. the resource is immutable to the types of processes being recorded and we're not talking, for example, about a live web page going through edit processes)? 

 Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-prov-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-prov-wg-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Luc Moreau
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 5:54 AM
> To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: updates to PAQ doc for discussion
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I am joining late this conversation, but I'd like to comment on Paul's
> sentence:
> 
>  > It may be the case that the resource (e.g. a web page) is a pil:Entity.
> 
> I don't think this makes sense at all. A pil:Entity is a construct of the data
> model.
> 
> Definition: An Entity represents an identifiable characterized thing.
> 
> So, it is reasonable to compare resource and thing (as in the model
> document), but not resource and pil:entity.
> 
> However, we can say a pil:entity is an assertion about a resource.
> For a given resource, there may be many pil:entity about that resource.
> 
> Luc
> 
> On 08/11/2011 07:01 PM, Paul Groth wrote:
> > Hi Jim, Khalid:
> >
> > In the model, provenance is described with respect to pil:Entities. In
> > the PAQ document, we describe access primarily with respect to the Web
> > Architecture. It may be the case that the resource (e.g. a web page)
> > is a pil:Entity. If so, then the access approach says go ahead and use
> > the url of that resource to find the provenance of it within an
> > identified set of provenance information.
> >
> > However, it may be the case that the resource is not a pil:Entity. In
> > that case, we provide a mechanism (Target-URIs) that let you associate
> > the resource to a pil:Entity (the target) such that you can identify a
> > characterization of the resource and thus find it in some provenance
> > provenance information.
> >
> > This approach also lets you have multiple pil:Entities associated with
> > a particular resource.
> >
> > We are just rying to find a simple way to let the accessor know when
> > they get some provenance information what they should be looking for
> > within that provenance information.
> >
> > Now, if one says that every resource is  a pil:Entity, we may not need
> > this. Is that what you're saying? and can you explain how this is the
> > case?
> >
> > I hope this clarifies what we are trying to enable.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Myers, Jim wrote:
> >>
> >> I think the gist of the discussion on the modeling side lately and
> >> the decision to have 'only Bobs' would shift this towards just
> >> talking about the link between provenance and resources with the
> >> model then having a mechanism to indicate when some resources are
> >> views of others, i.e. one URI is the page content on a given date and
> >> the other URI is the live page, but both are resources that can have
> >> provenance, and their provenance can contain links that indicate
> >> their relationship.
> >>
> >> Jim
> >>
> >> *From:*public-prov-wg-request@w3.org
> >> [mailto:public-prov-wg-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Khalid
> >> Belhajjame
> >> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2011 10:13 AM
> >> *To:* Paul Groth
> >> *Cc:* public-prov-wg@w3.org
> >> *Subject:* Re: updates to PAQ doc for discussion
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> My main concern reading sections 1 and 3, is the use of both resource
> >> and target entity. I understand that the idea is that a web resources
> >> may be associated with multiple target entities, and that there is a
> >> need to identify which target the provenance describes. However,
> >> having to go through the two levels resource then entity is a bit
> >> confusing, specially for a reader is not aware of the discussions
> >> that we had about the two concepts.
> >>
> >> Suggestion: Would it be really bad if we confine ourselves to the
> >> provenance vocabulary and describe how the provenance of an Entity,
> >> as opposed to a resource, can be accessed?
> >>
> >> Other comments:
> >>
> >> - In the definition of a resource, it said that "a resource may be
> >> associated with multiple targets". It would be good if we could
> >> clarify this relationship a bit more.
> >>
> >> - I find the definition of provenance information a bit vague, the
> >> body of the definition says pretty much the same thing as the title
> >> of the definition. If we don't have a better idea of what can be
> >> said, it is probably better to remove it.
> >>
> >> In Section 3, Second paragraph, "Once provenance information
> >> information" -> "once provenance information"
> >>
> >> In the same paragraph: "one needs how to identify" -> "one needs to
> >> know how to identify".
> >>
> >> Khalid
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 10/08/2011 20:37, Paul Groth wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> Graham and I have been making some changes to the PAQ document [1]
> >> that we would like to request feedback on at tomorrow's telecon.
> >>
> >> In particular, we have updated Sections 1 and 3. We've added a
> >> section on core concepts and made section 3 reflect these concepts.
> >> We think this may address PROV-ISSUE-46 [2].
> >>
> >> Please take a look and let us know what you think.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> Note: Section 4 Provenance discovery service is still under heavy
> >> editing
> >>
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/paq/provenance-
> access.htm
> >> l [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/46
> >>
> >
> 
> --
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
> University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
> Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
> United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
>

Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2011 13:19:51 UTC