- From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:21:36 +0000
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Tim it does exist. Indeed there are numerous constraints that I call "non-actionable", such as "traceability assertion" for example, which describe semantics but cannot be used to make new assertions, or even to check consistency. There is a proposal to push all constraints into a separate section, and in that setting it will be easier to make this distinction. -Paolo On 11/22/11 7:58 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > Luc and Paolo, > > Does this distinction among constraints still exist? > > If so, could/is it described in the latest DM? > > Thanks, > Tim > > > >>>> We are proposing to make a distinction between >>> - inferences >>> - so-called constraints that are there for the purpose of interpretation >>> - constraints that need to be enforced in the data model to be "well formed".
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2011 09:22:14 UTC