Re: assertion language

+1

On 29 June 2011 08:43, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We have regularly mentioned the notions of provenance assertions and
> asserters in the context of provenance.
> In order to regularize this, I would like us to reach consensus on a
> statement, which make this explicit.
> This idea has already been discussed with members of the Model TF.
>
> PROPOSED: PIL is an assertion language which allows asserters to make
> assertions about stuffs and
> activities in the real world (as they view it) and how they influence each
> other.
>
> So, to say that there is a thing, a process execution,  a derivation, or an
> "IVP of" relation, is indeed
> making assertions using PIL constructs.
>
> It is the goal of this WG to specify the constructs of this assertion
> language. We currently debate
> concepts, which are very likely to become primitive constructs of the
> assertion language. But others
> constructs may be considered, e.g. rules, or others, but this is beyond the
> remit of this message.
>
> Can you express your support for the above proposal, or alternatives?
>
> Best regards,
> Luc
>
> --
> 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
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
>



-- 
Dr Simon Miles
Lecturer, Department of Informatics
Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
+44 (0)20 7848 1166

Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 14:07:37 UTC