RE: [higgins-dev] Poll to schedule a call to talk about Node replacment-

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

So I got a chance to talk with Tony about this today when we were on a panel
together at the IDtrust Symposium (after a lot of fun ribbing back and forth
-- some of it live on the panel ;-)

He lost no opportunity to point out how many times the word "entity" was
used in the presentations (which happened to be about reputation). And how
few times "node" was used (well, actually, none ;-)

Afterwards, I again explained my concern that if we adopt "entity" for what
is currently "node", we need to -- in certain very specific cases -- be able
to clearly distinguish between "entity" and the thing-being-represented --
the debate we were having this weekend.

But the new idea was that if "entity" by itself ALWAYS means (in the context
of anything to do with Higgins) the representation, then the only time we
would need to add a modifier would be those few cases where we need to
explicitly refer to the thing-being-represented.

In IM with Paul tonight, we agreed there's an obvious choice for that term:
"represented entity".

Can folks live with "Entity" (replacement for "Node", formerly "Digital
Subject") and "Represented Entity" (replacement for previous meaning of
"Entity")?

If so, here would now be the definition of "Correlation" (translated
directly from http://wiki.eclipse.org/I-Node_Correlation), which originally
kicked off this whole discussion at the last F2F:

    * An Entity Correlation is a kind of Attribute of a source Entity.
    * Each value of a Entity Correlation identifies a target Entity.
    * Each source-target Entity pair expresses that both Entities are
representations of the same Represented Entity.

=Drummond 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul Trevithick
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 5:24 PM
> To: 'Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions'
> Subject: RE: [higgins-dev] Poll to schedule a call to talk aboutNode
> replacment--take tw
> 
> Yeah, I was worried about the fatigue factor too. If enough folks don't
> sign
> up to the latest doodle poll, then we'll just go ahead and change Node to
> Entity as per the vote.
> 
> Tony wrote:
> >
> > Paul it could be that people are getting a little tired  of the topic
> and
> > not sure how many times we have to discuss this to get the magic answer
> >
> > What are you looking for in this call. I have seen nothing that would
> > change my choice
> >
> > -----------------
> > Sent from my BlackBerry Handheld.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paul Trevithick" [paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 03/04/2008 02:44 PM
> > To: "'Higgins \(Trust Framework\) Project developer discussions'"
> > <higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: [higgins-dev] Poll to schedule a call to talk about Node
> > replacment    --take two
> >
> >
> >
> > I just looked at the "old" poll and only Drummond, Mary, Tom and I have
> > responded. This doesn't constitute a quorum for this topic IMO, so
> > consider
> > the above poll closed.
> >
> > Below is a new, replacement poll that includes slots for wed, thurs,
> > Friday.
> > Hopefully this time we'll get more participants.
> >
> > New Poll: http://doodle.ch/ekbez89udes8384r <-- vote here
> >
> > -Paul
> >
> > Old Poll: http://doodle.ch/participation.html?pollId=7sfxpr6hvu29wnys
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > higgins-dev mailing list
> > higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > higgins-dev mailing list
> > higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev