Re: PROV-ISSUE-66 (is-execution-a-bob): Why is process execution not defined as a characterised entity? [Conceptual Model]

Hi Simon,

To me, process executions are the "verbs", whereas BOBs are the "nouns", 
and therefore
belong to different categories.

Several people have also mentioned they relate to perdurant/endurant in 
formal ontologies.

Being identifiable is therefore not the key characteristic!

Regards,
Luc


PS. In a separate thread, you mentioned that IVPof could be used for 
process executions.
    This may make sense, but in that case we simply need to change the 
signature of IVP of:
         BOB x BOB   U   PE x PE



On 07/29/2011 05:22 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-66 (is-execution-a-bob): Why is process execution not defined as a characterised entity? [Conceptual Model]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/66
>
> Raised by: Simon Miles
> On product: Conceptual Model
>
> This was mentioned by Satya in the call, but I can't see it having been raised as an issue yet.
>
> As process executions are identified and may have attributes, including start and end time, are they kinds of characterised entities, similarly to agent? If not, why not?
>
>
>
>
>    

-- 
Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm

Received on Monday, 1 August 2011 08:13:45 UTC