- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 05:40:00 +0000
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi stian, We say that entities are not activities and agents are kinds of entities ... Hence, my statement .... WasStartedBy in the new prov-dm is initially defined between activity and agent, and overloaded to work between activity and activity. Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom On 3 Dec 2011, at 01:26, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk<mailto:soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>> wrote: On Nov 21, 2011 10:07 AM, "Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org<mailto:sysbot%2Btracker@w3.org>> wrote: > -3.3: Note, how can you say that an agent can be a PE, when entity and activity are supposed to be disjoint. Really? Disjoint? That is certainly new to me, and a similar constraint is something that has bothered me in OPM-V. Then this raises the question, if an agent can control an activity, but an activity can't be an agent (and thus control another activity), how would you model such activity-activity control? By generating a new agent? I must admit I have not yet looked at Yolanda's For instance in scientific workflows you can have one process controlling the start/stop of another (based on used values), or subprocesses which are spawned, monitored and controlled by the mother activity.
Received on Saturday, 3 December 2011 05:41:02 UTC