W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > December 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-156 (TLebo): information flow ordering record - no temporal constraints? [Data Model]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 19:53:15 +0000
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EMEW3|ef7c9e0181daf10a69b991b4ea4892a8nB1JrJ08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|59A49846-614D-400C-AECD-5DCF158BA990@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Hi Tim,

It's the constraint Usage-generation-ordering
For any entity, the following temporal constraint holds: the generation<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#dfn-usage-event> of an entity always precedes<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#dfn-precedes> any of its usages<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#dfn-usage-event>.

Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science
University of Southampton
Southampton SO17 1BJ
United Kingdom

On 2 Dec 2011, at 19:25, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu<mailto:lebot@rpi.edu>> wrote:

(reposting to list so that the tracker finds it - I updated the diagram and phrasing, too.)


Thank you for adding the time constraint. I illustrated it with a red line in the diagram below.

I'm curious if another constraint should be added.

Nothing is stating that the usage event must follow the generation event.




On Nov 30, 2011, at 8:12 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:

Hi Tim,

The latest WD contains wasInformedBy-ordering listing the temporal constraint
associated with wasInformedBy.

I am proposing to close the issue pending review.

On 11/21/2011 04:07 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
Hi Tim,
You're right, a temporal interpretation constraint is missing.
I have added an explicit issue in the text. Hopefully, I will add it
later this week.

On 11/21/2011 03:06 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:

PROV-ISSUE-156 (TLebo): information flow ordering record - no temporal constraints? [Data Model]


Raised by: Timothy Lebo
On product: Data Model

According to 6.3 Activity Ordering Record

"wasInformedBy" is:

"An information flow ordering record is a representation that an entity was generated by an activity, before it was used by another activity."

But the only constraint does not include the temporal aspects described above:

"Given two activity records identified by a1 and a2, the record wasInformedBy(a2,a1) holds, if and only if there is an entity record identified by e and sets of attribute-value pairs attrs1 and attrs2, such that wasGeneratedBy(e,a1,attrs1) and used(a2,e,attrs2) hold."

Does the temporal constraint fall out of constraints that apply to wasGeneratedBy and used?
* If so, could this be made explicit?
* If not, can "attrs1" and "attrs2" be elaborated to include the "time used" and "time generated" AND their constrained ordering?


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<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 19:53:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:04 UTC