- From: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:45:36 +0000
- To: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Since there was no further discussion, I have closed this issue. --James On Jan 12, 2012, at 6:34 PM, James Cheney wrote: > I noticed this issue raised on the formal semantics is still open. > > It was raised originally by Luc, and the description was: > >> The subgroup dealing with semantics should consider how characteristics of an entity state generated by a process execution are determined (or not) by this process execution and the entity states this process process execution. There is a concern that in an open world we may have not asserted the actual entity states that caused this entity state. > > I believe that since then, PROV-DM has been rewritten to reflect a consensus that we should avoid mandating semantic constraints concerning causality or determination, so this concern is no longer relevant to PROV-SEM. Thus, I propose to close the issue after next week's teleconference unless there is further discussion before then. > > --James > > > On Jul 6, 2011, at 10:47 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > >> >> ISSUE-24: Semantic document address "P and things used by P determine values of some of X's invariant properties (less strict)" >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/24 >> >> Raised by: >> On product: >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > > -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 09:46:11 UTC