- From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 20:20:10 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Khalid, Can you expand on this? What would it help us to achieve? At F2F1, some mentioned "turtle all way down" to refer to the idea that we are not trying to make a distinction between an entity and its state (as we used to say then). This would translate into the fact that we only have characterized entities ... and are not trying to distinguish an entity from a characterized entity. Can you explain what benefits you see in distinguishing entity from characterized entity? So, does it mean in the example, you would say that e1 is same entity as e2? Potentially, this could be captured by (the very rough) definition of version. Luc On 21/07/2011 20:06, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-35: Section 4: How one would know that two BOBs are characterizations of the same entity? [Conceptual Model] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/35 > > Raised by: Khalid Belhajjame > On product: Conceptual Model > > > Do we need a mean to specify that two BOB are characterizations of the same entity? > > In the initial draft, I think that the editors intentionally avoided defining the term "entity" as part of the vocabulary. I don't suggest defining that term, but having a means by which one would know that two Bobs are characterizations, possibly different, of the same entity, e.g., using an assertion like "sameEntity(bob1, bob2)". > > I think this will be useful, amongst other things, in the definition of IVPof. > > Khalid > > > >
Received on Thursday, 21 July 2011 19:20:38 UTC