[higgins-dev] Another perspective on "entity"

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

The table Paul sent yesterday made me realize there's a different way to
think about our usage of the word "entity" in the Higgins data model (one
that aligns with what I think Tony and Mike have been saying).

The realization was that a pure Higgins Entity -- a single raw node in the
Higgins Global Graph -- is not actually a Resource because, until you add at
least one Attribute, it is not even identifiable (which is a requirement of
an Identity -- ITU definition -- or a Resource -- IETF/W3C RFC 3986
definition).

In other words, if the label "Entity" simply refers to a graph node
representing the pure concept of Entity, then it does not become any form of
"representation" of the Entity until you begin adding Attributes that turn
an Entity into an Identity. (That explains why Entity and Node seem so
interchangeable.)

If we take this approach, it eliminates the conflict with either the ITU or
IDGang. The table looks like this:

Concept          Higgins   ITU       GangLexicon       W3C
-------          -------   -----     -----------       ---
Thing            Entity    Entity    Entity            Resource
Representation   Identity  Identity  Digital Identity  Representation

=Drummond 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Trevithick [mailto:paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 10:55 AM
> To: Drummond Reed
> Cc: 'Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions'
> Subject: RE: Paul: "Represented Entity" ==> "Resource"?
> 
> So then we'd have:
> 
> Concept          Higgins   ITU       GangLexicon       W3C
> -------          -------   -----     -----------       ---
> The thing        Resource  Entity    Entity            Resource
> Representation   Entity    Identity  Digital Identity  Representation
> 
> 
> Do I have this right?
> 
> -Paul