- From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 13:39:56 +0000
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: Paolo Missier <paolo.missier@newcastle.ac.uk>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Luc On 1/17/12 6:59 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Paolo, Stian > > To answer the transitivity question, we need to answer a question. Can an entity characterise different things? If yes, I agree transitivity does not necessarily hold. If no, transitivity holds. from Jim's earlier comprehensive message, I gather that the answer is not: > each entity therefore represents one full characterization of some thing (and only one - they are unambiguous w.r.t. everything being asserted) . but also please see my reply to Jim, with the suggestion that temporal overlaps ought to be reintroduced. But we've been there before: entity records do not mention temporal validity. So if temporal overlaps are an argument against transitivity in this case, then I believe the best we can do is remove transitivity and do a bit of hand-waiving when asked about it :-) -Paolo
Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 13:40:20 UTC