W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > June 2007

RE: [Obo-relations] Advancing translational research with the Semantic Web (Not clear about definition of <is_location_of_process>)

From: Kashyap, Vipul <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 13:36:31 -0400
Message-ID: <DBA3C02EAD0DC14BBB667C345EE2D1244285E2@PHSXMB20.partners.org>
To: "Smith, Barry" <phismith@buffalo.edu>
Cc: <samwald@gmx.at>, <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, <obo-relations@lists.sourceforge.net>


> The life process, for instance, in cryogenics?

[VK] Would you consider the life process to be suspended when a person is in a
coma? And reactivated when he emerges from a coma?

> >- An interesting corollary is that the execution of a program needs to be
> >distinguished from a program (please feel free to fill in the biological
> >equivalents).
> 
> This is the basis of BFO's discussion between realizable entities
> such as functions and the processes which are their realizations; the
> former are continuants, the latter are occurrents.
> 
> >- A process comes into existence only when a computer program executes.
> 
> A process of a certain kind ...

Let me try to use some of your terminology (please correct me if there are any
errors):
- A process is an occurrent
- It is a realization (or manifestation?) of a function or a program
- Because it is an occurrent "it has temporal parts and unfolds itself in
multiple phases"

So process phase = process state...

Return to the program-process: It can be in an activation phase, running phase,
suspended phase, terminated phase (vhere it ceases existence)...

At the very least, since an occurrent either exists/doesn't exist at a given
point in time, a process at least has two states:
- Existence
- Non-existence

Different kinds of processes like life processes and computer processes could
have more specialized states?

> >  For instance
> >the process1 = execution of the web browser program; waits-for
> >messages from process2 = execution of the web server program.
> 
> Again, you are confusing the device which executes with the process
> which is the execution. The device waits.

[VK] Let's consider the following scenario:
A process can be swapped out of memory and another process can be swapped into
memory for execution. In that case the process is still waiting, while the
device (because it's executing another process) is not.

I would propose that in the above scenario, it's the process which is waiting
and not the device?

> This does not help, I'm afraid.

[VK] Refer to the above attempt to define states of an occurrent.

> In fact, precisely because of the confused use of 'state' in so many
> quarters, BFO recommends that it not be used at all. But for all that
> you could want in this connection see:
> http://www.ifomis.uni-saarland.de/bfo/

[VK] So would you be comfortable with the use of "phase" as opposed to "state"?

Also, in general one view of a process could be:
Process = Participants (Actors) + Actions (Tasks) + Temporal Parts (Phases?)
Actions could lead to phase transition, e.g., migration of a process from one
device to another.

There are two ways then of defining <process-location>
1. The location of (All) participants of the process at a particular point in
time
2. The location of a Task of the process at a particular point in time.

Obviously you have chosen (1), though (2) is an alternate way of defining
<process-location> and probably in the context of a given definition of a
process they are equivalent. Note that I have removed references to state/phase
from (2).

Why would you believe (if you do), that (1) is a more well-founded definition
than (2)?

Thanks,

---Vipul





The information transmitted in this electronic communication is intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this information in error, please contact the Compliance HelpLine at 800-856-1983 and properly dispose of this information.
Received on Friday, 1 June 2007 17:36:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:48 GMT