ISSUE-192: Section 5.3.2.1 (PROV-DM as on Nov 28)
Section 5.3.2.1 (PROV-DM as on Nov 28)
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- prov-dm
- Raised by:
- Satya Sahoo
- Opened on:
- 2011-12-07
- Description:
- Hi,
The following are my comments for Section 5.3.2.1 of the PROV-DM (as on Nov 28):
Section 5.3.2.1
1. "For example, a programmer and a researcher could both be associated with running a workflow, but it may not matter what programmer clicked the button to start the workflow while it would matter a lot what researcher told the programmer to do so. Another example: a student publishing a web page describing an academic department could result in both the student and the department being agents associated with the activity, and it may not matter what student published a web page but it matters a lot that the department told the student to put up the web page. So there is some notion of responsibility that needs to be captured."
Comment: There is no reason to assign more importance to researcher or department versus the programmer or student - these are purely application-specific interpretations and cannot be generalized. A simple counter-example is, "there was error on the Web page", which student is responsible for adding content to the Web page.
Thanks.
Best,
Satya - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-192: Section 5.3.2.1 (PROV-DM as on Nov 28) [prov-dm] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-02-15)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-192: Section 5.3.2.1 (PROV-DM as on Nov 28) [prov-dm] (from satya.sahoo@case.edu on 2012-02-14)
- Re: prov-dm - when are constructs too domain specific? (from GK@ninebynine.org on 2012-01-03)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-192: Section 5.3.2.1 (PROV-DM as on Nov 28) [prov-dm] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2011-12-08)
- prov-dm - when are constructs too domain specific? (from p.t.groth@vu.nl on 2011-12-07)
- PROV-ISSUE-192: Section 5.3.2.1 (PROV-DM as on Nov 28) [prov-dm] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2011-12-07)
Related notes:
No additional notes.
Display change log
