- From: Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:34:24 -0500
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>, public-prov-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAOMwk6yinwZ+9nV4q85DtkU0YwziqmbaOdiQz_UZ8n5RBtZhPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Luc, I am comfortable with closing this issue. Thanks. Best, Satya On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>wrote: > Hi Satya and Tim, > > I am now closing this issue, pending review. > Constraints for attributes were removed in WD2, and interpretations have > now been moved in a separate section, clarifying the issue flagged here. > > Feel free to reopen, if the issue is not addressed satisfactorily. > > Cheers, > Luc > > > On 12/03/2011 12:38 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > >> I have noticed the new distinctions using "interpretation" in the latest >> draft, and it has made it easier to see the difference. >> >> With regard to "moving all constraints to one section", I'm curious to >> see if this makes it more difficult to read and understand any one >> construct. >> >> I'll wait and see! >> >> Regards, >> Tim >> >> >> On Nov 29, 2011, at 4:40 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: >> >> >> >>> 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<http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > -- > 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<http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm> > > >
Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2012 21:38:18 UTC