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

PROV-ISSUE-148 (WasScheduledAfter): wasScheduledAfter definition is difficult to understand

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:47:11 +0000
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1ROWqN-0002Hq-CQ@lowblow.w3.org>

PROV-ISSUE-148 (WasScheduledAfter): wasScheduledAfter definition is difficult to understand

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/148

Raised by: Khalid Belhajjame
On product: 


Hi, 

Trying to model wasScheduledAfter in PROV-O, I found it difficult to understand what wasScheduledAfter means.

According to the definition: "Given two activity records identified by pe1 and pe2, the record wasScheduledAfter(pe2,pe1) holds, if and only if there are two entity records identified by e1 and e2, such that wasControlledBy(pe1,e1,qualifier(prov:role="end")) and wasControlledBy(pe2,e2,qualifier(prov:role="start")) and wasDerivedFrom(e2,e1)."

There are three issues: 
1- Why does the agent e2 needs to be derived from the agent e1?

2- Can an agent be derived from another? (This second issue is secondary).

3- There is an assumption in the definition that the activity pe1 needs to be explicitly terminated by an agent? I guess there are cases, the activity will terminates without an agent intervention, and will be followed by the execution of other activity. According to the above definition, in those cases, we will not be able to use wasScheduledAfter.

khalid
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 15:47:19 UTC

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