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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-127: Constraint id= participation (PROV DM and PROV ontology) [Data Model]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:53:35 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|e07a70f2242a39ca44eadd786e825237nAYCre08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4ED6274F.6010703@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Satya,

Your example:
"For example, a quality control inspector "qci1" on a factory floor is 
"involved" in production (PE instance "prod1") of "honda civic car" by 
observing the prod1 PE and taking notes. But qci1 is not linked to prod1 
by "used" or "wasControlledBy" or "wasComplementOf" properties, but qci1 
is a participant in prod1."

was a key driver behind Yolanda's proposal of agent and activity 
relation, which is now implemented
in the document.

For your example, you would write wasAssociatedWith(prod1,qci1).

I trust this answers your concern and we can close the issue.

Regards,
Luc

On 10/17/2011 01:25 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-127: Constraint id= participation (PROV DM and PROV ontology) [Data Model]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/127
>
> Raised by: Satya Sahoo
> On product: Data Model
>
> Hi,
> The following constraint is defined for participation in the PROV-DM (in mercurial fpwd head on Oct 16, 2011):
> "Given two identifiers pe and e, respectively identifying a process execution expression and an entity expression, the expression hadParticipant(pe,e) holds if and only if:
> a) used(pe,e) holds, or
> b) wasControlledBy(pe,e) holds, or
> c) wasComplementOf(e1,e) holds for some entity expression identified by e1, and hadParticipant(pe,e1) holds some process execution expression identified by pe."
>
>
> Issue:
> This constraint is not necessary for assertion or inferring a participation property between an Entity instance and PE instance. The current definition uses "involvement" to link an Entity instance with a PE instance by "hadParticipant" relation, but "used" "wasControlledBy" and "wasComplementOf" are not an exhaustive list of properties for defining "involvement".
>
> For example, a quality control inspector "qci1" on a factory floor is "involved" in production (PE instance "prod1") of "honda civic car" by  observing the prod1 PE and taking notes. But qci1 is not linked to prod1 by "used" or "wasControlledBy" or "wasComplementOf" properties, but qci1 is a participant in prod1.
>
> Suggestion is to remove this constraint completely since it is out of scope of this WG to enumerate all possible "involvement" properties that need be identified and listed to create this constraint.
>
>
>
>    

-- 
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, 30 November 2011 12:54:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:10 UTC