- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 18:24:02 +0000
- To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
To answer your question, we also have prov:type. So what's the difference? Luc Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom On 31 May 2012, at 18:03, "Graham Klyne" <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > On 31/05/2012 17:17, Miles, Simon wrote: >> Hello Graham, >> >>> From today's discussion, that's what I thought you meant, but why isn't that just subtyping of relations, which I believe we already allow? > > I feel I'm missing something here ... I thought they (roles) were *the* mechanism for subtyping relations (in DM). > > So, yes, it is subtyping of relations. > > #g > -- > >> thanks, >> Simon >> >> Dr Simon Miles >> Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics >> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK >> +44 (0)20 7848 1166 >> >> accounting for the reasons behind contractual violations: >> http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1283/ >> ________________________________________ >> From: Graham Klyne [graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk] >> Sent: 31 May 2012 17:11 >> To: W3C provenance WG >> Subject: Definition of role >> >> Following today's teleconference, this came to me: >> >> [[ >> A role is a restriction on a relationship between entities, agents and/or >> activities, which qualifies the nature of the relationship. >> ]] >> >> I think that says what's needed. But it does need supporting by some examples. >> >> #g >> -- >> >
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2012 18:24:45 UTC