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

PROV-ISSUE-126: Section 5.3.3.2 "Process Execution Independent Derivation Expression." [Data Model]

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 00:04:02 +0000
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1RFECw-0001Ia-M1@lowblow.w3.org>

PROV-ISSUE-126: Section 5.3.3.2 "Process Execution Independent Derivation Expression." [Data Model]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/126

Raised by: Satya Sahoo
On product: Data Model

Hi,
This is a review comment for Section 5.3.3.2 "Process Execution Independent Derivation Expression." in the PROV-DM document (in mercurial fpwd head on Oct 15, 2011).

Issue: The current definition for "Process Execution Independent Derivation Expression." Section 5.3.3.2 states that:
"A process execution independent derivation expression is a representation of a derivation, which occurred by any means whether direct or not, and regardless of any activity in the world."

a) Does the above definition mean that an Entity instance e1 can be derived from another Entity instance e2 without the existence of "transformed from, created from, or affected by" activities?

b)  If the above definition just means that there exists some PE linked to the derivation of e2 from e1, but a provenance application may not be aware of it, then how does it relate to the constraint "derivation-process-execution" defined for "Process Execution Linked Derivation Assertion" in Section 5.3.3.1?

The current definition of "wasDerivedFrom" states that there was an activity of "transformed from, created from, or affected by" that links the two Entity instances, which is *summarized* by the wasDerivedFrom property. Hence, "Process Execution Independent Derivation Expression" is not consistent with current definition of derivation.
Received on Sunday, 16 October 2011 00:04:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:44 GMT