W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model]

From: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 14:29:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAtgn=S1JfDoBukvMzJh187fVj=BPcYUYCAZZeW1w0K-s-y5vQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>, ProvenanceWorking Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

>  On 2 Apr 2012, at 18:54, "Jim McCusker" <mccusj@rpi.edu> wrote:
>
> 2. Is alternate reflexive or not?  With time based definition it seems it
>> is. With specialisation based definition it seems it may not be (depends
>> whether any entity is always a specialisation of some entity)
>>
>
>  I think that it's okay for alternate to be reflexive. The controversy
> was whether or not specialization is.
>
> Reflexivity is not obvious with your definition.  Since for alternateOf
> (e,e) to hold, e needs to be specialisation of an entity. Is it?
>

Good point. I'll leave it up to those who wish to have reflexivity for
alternateOf to make their case.

Jim
-- 
Jim McCusker
Programmer Analyst
Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
Yale School of Medicine
james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330
http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu

PhD Student
Tetherless World Constellation
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
mccusj@cs.rpi.edu
http://tw.rpi.edu
Received on Monday, 2 April 2012 18:30:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:07:03 GMT