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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-43 (derivation-time): Deriviation should have associated time [Conceptual Model]

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 09:53:41 +0100
Message-ID: <4EBA3F95.3080500@vu.nl>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Luc,

For me this is about, saying the following:

blogpost wasDerivedFrom Report at 10am Thursday

Sure there is some process there, there may be an interval. But I just 
don't want to assert all that information.

Again, my fundamental thing is that I want to assert derivation chains 
without (knowingly) asserting anything about process.

Maybe the point is I'm looking for a shortcut such that if I assert a 
time it automagically infers that the e2, and e1 are on the same time 
line using the same clock and are the same time?

Does that make sense?

Paul

Luc Moreau wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> I'd like to come back to this issue, and see how we can solve it.
>
> The fully expanded notion of derivation, written
> wasDerivedFrom(e2,e1,pe,q2,q1),
> refers to the generation event for e2, and the use event for e1.
> So, they form an "interval".  If we have time information for
> each of these events (and assuming a same clock), we can compute the
> duration
> of this interval.
>
> So, the question is, do you really have a use case, where you don't want
> to assert the use/generation events (qualified usage/generation) but want
> to express time?  Can you explain it?
>
> My concern is that we are at risk of introducing two placeholders for
> the same time information
> (in derivation or use/generation events). Two placeholders for time may
> result in inconsistent
> information.
>
> Luc
>
>
> On 07/23/2011 04:46 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> PROV-ISSUE-43 (derivation-time): Deriviation should have  associated time [Conceptual Model]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/43
>>
>> Raised by: Paul Groth
>> On product: Conceptual Model
>>
>> Other relationships have time associated with them (e.g. use, generation, control)
>>
>> There is no optional time associated with derivation.
>>
>> Suggested resolution is to add the following to the definition of isDerivedFrom:
>>
>> -  May contain a "derived from time" t, the time or time intervals when b1 was derived from b2
>>
>> Example:
>> isDerivedFrom(b1,b2, t)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Received on Wednesday, 9 November 2011 08:57:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:48 GMT