ISSUE-249: Why do we have 3 derivations?
two-derivations
Why do we have 3 derivations?
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- prov-dm
- Raised by:
- Luc Moreau
- Opened on:
- 2012-02-09
- Description:
- We currently have 3 derivations:
A precise-1 derivation, written wasDerivedFrom(id, e2, e1, a, g2, u1, attrs)
An imprecise-1 derivation, written wasDerivedFrom(id, e2,e1, t, attrs)
An imprecise-n derivation, written wasDerivedFrom(id, e2, e1, t, attrs)
Imprecise-1/imprecise-1 are distinguished with the attribute prov:steps.
Why do we need 3 derivations?
I believe that imprecise-n derivation is required for the 'scruffy provenance' use case.
I believe that precise-1 derivation is required for the 'proper provenance' use case: in particular, it's a requirement for provenance based reproducibility.
I don't understand why we have imprecise-1. Why can we just have
imprecise-n and precise-1?
PS. If we go with this proposal, then they could simply be called imprecise/precise, and we don't need the attribute steps.
PS2. They would essentially be a unqualified and a qualified derivation (in prov-o terminology).
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-04-17)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-03-08)
- Re: prov-wg: Telecon Agenda March 8, 2012 (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-03-08)
- Re: prov-wg: Telecon Agenda March 8, 2012 (from graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2012-03-08)
- Re: prov-wg: Telecon Agenda March 8, 2012 (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-03-08)
- Re: prov-wg: Telecon Agenda March 8, 2012 (from l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-03-07)
- Re: prov-wg: Telecon Agenda March 8, 2012 (from p.t.groth@vu.nl on 2012-03-07)
- Re: prov-wg: Telecon Agenda March 8, 2012 (from graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2012-03-06)
- prov-wg: Telecon Agenda March 8, 2012 (from p.t.groth@vu.nl on 2012-03-06)
- Re: Scruffy vs proper (from lebot@rpi.edu on 2012-03-03)
- Re: Scruffy vs proper (was: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm]) (from lebot@rpi.edu on 2012-03-03)
- RE: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm] (from simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk on 2012-02-13)
- Re: Scruffy vs proper (from GK@ninebynine.org on 2012-02-10)
- Re: Scruffy vs proper (was: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm]) (from dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es on 2012-02-10)
- Scruffy vs proper (was: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm]) (from GK@ninebynine.org on 2012-02-10)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm] (from dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es on 2012-02-10)
- Re: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm] (from Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk on 2012-02-10)
- PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2012-02-09)
Related notes:
No additional notes.
Display change log