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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-124: Constraints on Used Relation (PROV-DM and PROV-OM) [Conceptual Model]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:40:06 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|b3d49f26cb31f7a1f020665566e7b787nAS9e908L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4ED4A876.1060807@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Tim,
Yes, to confirm, we will make the change, but it will be in the third 
working draft.
This said, the current document, already introduces 'interpretation' , 
wherever appropriate.

Luc

On 11/29/2011 09:21 AM, Paolo Missier wrote:
> 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".
>
>

-- 
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 Tuesday, 29 November 2011 09:40:35 UTC

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