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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-340 (start-by-activity-is-comm): Start by Activity is Communication; drop it. [prov-dm]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 13:18:21 -0400
Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <EDFE1C94-8777-4703-BB1A-F1709EBF5F62@rpi.edu>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Luc,

Are you saying that there are entities that trigger an activity that are not used by that same activity?

I would think that anything that triggered an activity would also be used by the activity (the trigger was used to start the activity).

Are triggers properly treated in PROV, or we using some legacy terms to discuss these concepts?

Thanks,
Tim

On Apr 11, 2012, at 12:37 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:

> Hi Tim,
> 
> This is not a Communication since the entity generated by the starter is only trigger for the started activity (hence, not used).
> 
> What would be the case for dropping it?  
> 
> Workflow people, what's your view?
> 
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science
> University of Southampton 
> Southampton SO17 1BJ
> United Kingdom
> 
> On 10 Apr 2012, at 21:37, "Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
> 
>> PROV-ISSUE-340 (start-by-activity-is-comm): Start by Activity is Communication; drop it. [prov-dm]
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/340
>> 
>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>> On product: prov-dm
>> 
>> Start by Activity continues to be an outlier in this model. It's just a simple case of communication. 
>> 
>> Propose to drop "start by activity" and address it with existing structures and an entry in a best practices document.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
Received on Sunday, 22 April 2012 17:18:52 GMT

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