W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-comments@w3.org > October 2012

activity delegation (ISSUE-522)

From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:15:34 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|4b81a9361f1e7f2d41d9f7f1c2f14674o9OAFb08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|50890336.6080609@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-comments@w3.org

Dear all,

In response to the further feedback on ISSUE-522, I have extended our 
response to this issue,
as follows.

(see 
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-522_.28Activity_Delegation.29)
> It is true that, in a delegation, activity is optional. The reviewer 
> suggests "Therefore, it is possible to state that one agent is the 
> delegate of another, irrespective of any activity. This delegation 
> likely is not indefinite, however, and is bounded by some context 
> (e.g., time, role within an organization, etc). It should be possible 
> to describe the bounds of the delegation.". But it is not the intended 
> semantics:
>
>   * PROV constraints defines the semantics of optional arguments, and
>     specifically, in Table 3, explains that activity in delegation is
>     expandable.
>   * It means that an absent activity can be replaced by an existential
>     variable. Hence,
>   * actedOnBehalfOf(ag2,ag1) really means that agent ag2 acted on
>     behalf of agent ag1 in the context of some unspecified activity.
>     Some activity, not all activity.
>   * This (unspecified) activity defines the bounds of the delegation.
>     If these bounds need to be made explicit, than an activity also
>     needs to be made explicit.
>

Feedback welcome,
Luc

On 10/25/2012 12:39 AM, Freimuth, Robert, Ph.D. wrote:
>
>   * 1.1.25 ISSUE-522 (Activity Delegation)
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-522_.28Activity_Delegation.29>
>
>   * There were two parts to my comment. First, agents can be either
>     entities or activities.  Does delegation apply to only those
>     agents that are entities, or can activity-agents also delegate?
>   * Second, the definition of delegation includes only the delegate
>     and responsible agents; activity is optional.  Therefore, it is
>     possible to state that one agent is the delegate of another,
>     irrespective of any activity.  This delegation likely is not
>     indefinite, however, and is bounded by some context (e.g., time,
>     role within an organization, etc).  It should be possible to
>     describe the bounds of the delegation.  This might be done using
>     user-defined attributes, but interoperability would suffer without
>     some guidance within the spec.
>  *
>

-- 
Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2012 09:16:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 25 October 2012 09:16:07 GMT