Re: PROV-ISSUE-130 (YolandaGil): Definition and examples of "agent" should be clarified in Provenance Data Model (PROV-DM) Draft [Data Model]

Hi Yolanda,

I trust your proposal on agents suitably address your issue ;-)
It is now implemented in the prov-dm document.

I am closing this issue pending review,
Regards,
luc

On 10/20/2011 07:41 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-130 (YolandaGil): Definition and examples of "agent" should be clarified in Provenance Data Model (PROV-DM) Draft [Data Model]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/130
>
> Raised by: Yolanda Gil
> On product: Data Model
>
> In Section 3, "agents" are defined as capable of controlling a process.  This is a key concept, and I still have trouble with that definition.  In later examples you have the Royal Society, I think it is important that we explain that if Carol runs the process and works for the Royal Society it may be more important that the RS run it rather than Carol herself.  IMHO (and I brought this up at some call weeks ago), the notion of agent must be tied to a participating entity (as described in Section 5.3.8) who is noted in the provenance record to be accountable (or if that is too legalistic a term, one could say responsible) for the action.  In any case, the current definition should be better supported by examples, like the Royal society one.
>
> Also, section 4.1/4.2 has examples of agents but they are all people (all 5 of them), perhaps a good thing would be to broaden the example to illustrate better what can be considered agents.
>
>
>
>
>    

-- 
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 Wednesday, 30 November 2011 12:59:46 UTC