- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:24:23 +0100
- To: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
- CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|b6a990be9c9be79eafb9876d76e71134n6QBOS08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4E2FE757>
Activity is what is in the world (like entity) cf. introduction. A process execution is a pil construct/assertion. The process execution construct represents an activity in the world. Luc On 07/27/2011 09:38 AM, Khalid Belhajjame wrote: > > Hi Luc, > > The current definition states that "Generation represents the creation > of a new characterized entity by *an activity*. [...]" > > What I understood is that activity in the above definition refers to a > process execution. That is: "Generation represents the creation of a > new characterized entity by *a process execution*. [...]" > > I assumed that in the above definition the term "activity" was used > instead of "process execution" in order not to use the concepts parts > of the vocabulary, in this case "process execution", in the body of > the definitions, and to confine ourselves to the use of natural > language. Is this the case? > > Thanks, khalid > > On 27/07/2011 09:25, Luc Moreau wrote: >> Hi Khalid, >> I don't understand your comment. The text states: >> >> A process execution represents an identifiable activity, which >> performs a piece of work. >> >> Process execution is a pil language construct. >> >> It would make no sense to write >> >> "Generation represents the creation of a new identifiable >> characterized entity by a *process execution*." >> >> A characterized entity is not created by a language construct! It is >> created by the activity that the language construct represents. >> >> Luc >> >> On 07/27/2011 09:19 AM, Khalid Belhajjame wrote: >>> >>> Hi Luc, >>> >>> As Satya, I understood that identifiable activity in the the >>> definition refers to process execution. I didn't raise an issue >>> because I thought there was an effort in the definitions to avoid >>> using the vocabulary that we are defining and use only natural >>> language. Is that the case? >>> >>> khalid >>> >>> >>> On 27/07/2011 08:29, Luc Moreau wrote: >>>> Hi Satya, >>>> >>>> I don't think so. >>>> pil:generation, pil:BOB and pil:processExecution are constructs >>>> of the provenance language >>>> >>>> activity and entity should be understood with their natural >>>> language meaning. >>>> >>>> Hence, a process execution is not the same as an activity, but is a >>>> representation of an activity. >>>> >>>> Luc >>>> >>>> On 07/27/2011 02:04 AM, Satya Sahoo wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> Reading Paul/Luc's definition for isGeneratedBy: >>>>> "Generation represents the creation of a new identifiable >>>>> characterized entity by an identifiable activity." >>>>> >>>>> can we interpret that "identifiable activity" is same as "process >>>>> execution"? If yes, then we should use "process execution" >>>>> directly instead of using its definition (description?). >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Satya >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Paolo Missier >>>>> <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk <mailto:Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> can we just state upfront that assertions can only be made about >>>>> >>>>> - C-entities that are identifiable >>>>> - activities that are identifiable >>>>> >>>>> -Paolo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/25/11 8:45 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I suppose that if we follow this argument thoroughly, we >>>>> should write: >>>>> >>>>> "Generation represents the creation of a new identifiable >>>>> characterized entity by an identifiable activity." >>>>> >>>>> (We also have to do the same with Use ...) >>>>> >>>>> Definitions are becoming quite heavy ... thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> Luc >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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 Kingdomhttp://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> 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 Kingdomhttp://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm >> > -- 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 Wednesday, 27 July 2011 10:24:55 UTC