W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model]

From: Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 10:53:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+=hbbes+dvQkPAfC_43c0C5LN2Lyj6Y3EnS3-mccQO_6-hpRw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>

I had trouble understanding the reasoning of this example as well.
In our data model, the email would rather be a collection, and the
signature an element of it, rather than a specialization of it.
A specialization of "this email" would be, for example. the "printed
version on my desk", which *is* a specialization of "my thoughts on this
email thread".

Intuitively, I am having trouble coming up with a counterexample of the
transitivity of our specialization.

Tom De Nies
Ghent University - IBBT
Faculty of Engineering and Architecture
Department of Electronics and Information Systems - Multimedia Lab
Gaston Crommenlaan 8 bus 201, B-9050 Ledeberg-Ghent, Belgium

t: +32 9 331 49 59
e: tom.denies@ugent.be

URL:  http://multimedialab.elis.ugent.be

2012/4/2 Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>

> is this example really reflecting specialisation? The signature is
> contained in the email message. Is it a specialisation of it?
> On 2 Apr 2012, at 00:11, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <
> soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
> > My signature in the end of this email is a specialization of this
> > email message, which is a specialization of my thoughts on this email
> > thread. However the signature is not a specialization of those
> > thoughts.
Received on Monday, 2 April 2012 09:08:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:11 UTC