- From: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:44:27 -0700
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 15 December 2011 23:45:08 UTC
On Dec 15, 2011, at 3:21 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: >> PROPOSAL 2: Amend plan link record such that it is not a specialization of an activity association record. >> >> Comment: I do not think we should define all plans as agents. By our existing definition a plan is a "set of actions or steps ... to achieve some goal." It is a description (usually in the form of a document) of the action or actions an agent should take to achieve a desired goal. >> > > If the intent is to allow plans to be entities and not agents, it is not the only approach. > I would like to suggest that: > 1. Constraint http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#association-Agent > should not hold, since the notion of just being associated with an activity does not imply agency. > > 2. Define agency independently from wasAssociatedWith. > > If we do this, then I think we can keep hadPlan as a specialization of wasAssociatedWith. > > My rationale is to try and minimize the number of distinct concepts/relations in the model. +1 I definitely do not think association it should infer agency. --Stephan
Received on Thursday, 15 December 2011 23:45:08 UTC