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

Re: complementOf -> viewOf: proposed text

From: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:09:44 +0000
Cc: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Paolo Missier <paolo.missier@newcastle.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C6EC4D17-464A-45D3-8AC3-234C7644FA94@inf.ed.ac.uk>
To: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
In that case, would you (or Luc) also agree with describing "specializationOf(e1,e2)" as "e1 and e2 describe the same thing, and e1 is more detailed/specific than e2"?

The concern I have about specalizationOf is that it is about the descriptions, not the described things.  I can rationalize alternateOf as saying that "e1 and e2 refer to the same thing", which is almost what Luc wrote, but to rationalize specializationOf I need e1 and e2 to refer to descriptions, not things themselves.  (I think it is this distinction that is one of the root causes of confusion here.)

--James

On Jan 16, 2012, at 4:06 PM, Paolo Missier wrote:

> thing (we just crossed in the mail)
> -Paolo
> 
> On 1/16/12 4:03 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> Hi James,
>> 
>> 
>> To add on to this, did we really mean
>> 
>> e1 and e2 provide two different characterization of the same entity
>> 
>> or did we mean
>> 
>> e1 and e2 provide two different characterization of the same THING?
>> 
>> Luc
>> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Monday, 16 January 2012 16:10:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:11 UTC