W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > July 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-41 (distinct-roles): Distinct roles should be SHOULD and not MUST [Conceptual Model]

From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:10:46 +0100
Message-ID: <4E2D4F36.8090000@ncl.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
I have the same "MUSt->SHOULD" problem as for ISSUE-40: maybe complement this indication with best practice guidelines? as
informative only.
For our part, I think we should add an example to justify why this restriction is useful

-Paolo


> Currently, use has the following definition with respect to roles:
>
> "A reference to a given BOB may appear in multiple use assertions that refer to a given process execution, but each of those use
> assertions must have a distinct role."
>
> A process execution could conceivably read the same file twice. Thus, the file would play the same role twice with respect to a
> process execution. It's not clear why this constraint is an absolute or the impact of making it a non-hard requirement.
>
> Although, I can see why it would be recommended practice in order to ensure disambiguation of roles.
>
> Suggested resolution, change the sentence to as follows:
>
> "A reference to a given BOB may appear in multiple use assertions that refer to a given process execution, but each of those use
> assertions should have a distinct role."


-- 
-----------  ~oo~  --------------
Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK
http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier
Received on Monday, 25 July 2011 11:11:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:37 GMT