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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-94 (pe-attributes): are process executions characterized in the same way as entities? [Conceptual Model]

From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 11:49:17 +0100
Message-ID: <4E7C642D.5050907@ncl.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi,

we have just closed issue 94 pending review, however the idea of extending complementOf to operate on PEs is potentially a 
reasonable one.
We propose that a separate issue be opened so that a focused discussion can take place. Stian if you stand by this, would you do it?

Thanks,
   -Paolo


On 9/15/11 3:50 PM, Khalid Belhajjame wrote:
> Stian,
>
> What do you mean by complementOf between process execution?
>    Was this defined somewhere?
>
> Thanks, khalid
>
>
> On 15/09/2011 15:26, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:21, Simon Miles<simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>   wrote:
>>
>>> Is there similar need for process executions to have characterising
>>> attributes, or is it just making the standard more complex?
>> I had a thought this morning that process executions as entities can
>> be useful to cover the idea of nested process executions as well. So
>> for instance in my workflow example there is a overall PE for
>> executing the workflow, which is composed of individual PEs for each
>> service invocation - which in theory could have even deeper PEs
>> detailing the command line invocations.
>>
>>
>> The definitions of complementOf in
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#expression-complement-of
>> seem to apply to this case.
>>
>> This somewhat solves the question if an entity can be generated by
>> several PEs - you can say "Yes, but only if there is a complementOf
>> relationship between PEs".
>>
>> If we don't go for this, then I would still want to propose a similar
>> property to relate two such process executions. It could just be that
>> the overall PE is "using" its children - but then we no longer
>> distinguish between data and process - perhaps that is a good thing.
>>
>>
>> You will also have a start and end-time of the Process Execution. Now
>> we do don't have a formal to attach these to entities at the moment
>> (Except start is related to when the Generation happened, and the
>> mention of "characterization intervals" and events which is never used
>> in the abstract syntax).
>>
>>
>> However I am not sure about the entity properties for PEs - which
>> properties would be "partially dependent" on each other in the case of
>> two process executions?
>>
>> Let's say we have two PEs which are  a complementOf PE - they could be
>> complementary views of the same overall process, for instance PE1 can
>> have { location: "Factory" } and PE2 can have { location: "Warehouse"
>> } - both part of the overall PE describing how the product came appear
>> in a box in a shop.
>>
>>
>


-- 
-----------  ~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 Friday, 23 September 2011 10:49:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:42 GMT