[ImageDM]: Provenance

[CresitelloDittmar, Mark]

Arnold,

Don't worry.. there will be plenty of time to sort the pieces.  What I
wanted from this thread is to decide how to show the current relationship
between some items in the "Provenance" domain and the ObservationDataset.
Where we go from here with the Observation/Dataset thing is another matter.

Mark



On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Arnold Rots <arots at cfa.harvard.edu> wrote:

> I am not sure I get the full implications of what you are suggesting.
> If it means that Provenance is something that comes to us through
> Observation, then I think it is the wrong path.
> Provenance is something that is, inalienably, a property of a Dataset.
> It may include information that is inherited from an Observation, but
> that is information that characterizes the Observation - not its
> Provenance.
> If you want to take this to a more abstract level, one could argue that
> the Observation is part of the Provenance contents of a Dataset, not
> the other way around.
>
> Cheers,
>
>   - Arnold
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Arnold H. Rots                                          Chandra X-ray
> Science Center
> Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory                   tel:  +1 617 496
> 7701
> 60 Garden Street, MS 67                                      fax:  +1 617
> 495 7356
> Cambridge, MA 02138
> arots at cfa.harvard.edu
> USA
> http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~arots/
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 3:42 PM, CresitelloDittmar, Mark <
> mdittmar at cfa.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>> All,
>>
>> While we aren't trying to define the content of the Provenance package in
>> this thread, this input has been really helpful to me.
>> I'm not cutting off discussion on the thread, but I do want to avoid this
>> going off into an attempt to define Provenance.
>>
>> For the present question, what I'm getting is that the Provenance package
>> doesn't have a logical 'head'.  Where the expectation is that users will
>> include "Provenance" and get everything they need.  Instead, it is (will
>> be) a collection of classes and groupings which users (like Observation )
>> might choose from as needed, perhaps grouping them locally.  Even this is
>> speculation, so I would hesitate to add organization to something which is
>> still very undefined.
>>
>> So I think adding a "Provenance" class to the ObsCore Provenance package
>> would be inappropriate.
>>
>> It *may* be appropriate to add a Provenance container at the Observation
>> level, but I see no compelling reason to do so for the "as is" picture that
>> we are working.  It may be that during the further discussion of the
>> ImageDM and Observation/Dataset issues, that we want to add some
>> organization to components, but it isn't clear that a single 'Provenance'
>> node would be helpful.
>>
>> Again, I am not closing discussion on the thread, but am leaning heavily
>> in the direction of option 'b', and will be updating my diagram accordingly
>> unless I hear a strong objection.
>> I expect the next drop of the image to be to the twiki (either directly
>> or via link) so as to not pollute mailboxes with outdated images.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/dm/attachments/20131119/4163e486/attachment.html>