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

Re: Difference between wasInformedBy and wasStartedByActivity

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 12:27:19 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPRnXtmrryoFJ+TJKGQ__O9Y+5OS4WJ8XZYCpm7=m5UvGYGQJQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Right, well, we confused each other as they are so similar, even when
I thought I had it!

Let's continue on Khalid's thread on the public list.

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi Khalid,

Stian ;)

>
> On 03/05/2012 10:48, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:

>> OK, so we say the subworkflow was using some data generated by the
>> main workflow. But then.. what is the value of the
>> wasInformedByActivity statement? It would just be restating something
>> anyone could infer.
> I am confused. Are you talking about wasStartedByActivity or wasInformedBy?
> I guess you are talking about wasStartedByActivity. And I think this is
> precisely why Tim is also pushing to keep only one of them in the DM.

A wasInformedBy B says that B used X, wasGeneratedBy A. If we also
know entity X and how it was used and generated, wasInformedBy is just
restating that.

A wasStartedByActivity B says that B wasStartedBy X, which
wasGeneratedBy A. If we also know that entity X and how it started A
and was generated by B, then wasStartedByActivity is just restating
that.


So both are shortcuts, and should have value as such where we don't
know much about X, or where we add more data to that indirect
relationship.


-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2012 11:28:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 3 May 2012 11:28:09 GMT