- 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>
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.) Luc, 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. Regards, Tim <PastedGraphic-2.tiff> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/f8c191710aad/diagrams/activity-ordering-records-information-flow-ordering.png 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. Regards, Luc 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. Luc 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] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/156 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? Thanks, Tim -- 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