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

RE: PROV-ISSUE-4: Defining Agent using FOAF's definition

From: Myers, Jim <MYERSJ4@rpi.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 13:01:47 -0400
Message-ID: <B7376F3FB29F7E42A510EB5026D99EF20534A595@troy-be-ex2.win.rpi.edu>
To: <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
> Agreed. :-)  Although it would also be part of establishing trust to also see
> what was NOT done (eg. "Sterilize the microscope plate") - but knowledge of
> what 'should have been done' is clearly out of scope.
> Considering what DID happen would typically be compared to the known
> practice/procedure/workflow/etc - and our provenance model would have
> enough information to answer queries to validate that side of the story.

And to establish the 'recipe link' from the provenance to the procedure...
Received on Friday, 24 June 2011 17:03:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:05 UTC