Re: Fwd: PROV-DM semantics


the passage below is indeed relevant for the DM and may be of worry  (I assume it's "specializationOf"). I don't know enough about 
these "simple formalisms" to be able to comment, but it does raise a flag.

(Is session 6 the only place where SEM is discussed?)


On 1/30/12 9:24 PM, James Cheney wrote:
>   I'd be quite careful in defining semantics for some relations which
> >  >  assume certain operations on time, eg. specificationOf, where the condition
> >  >  says that the lifetime of one object has to be contained in a lifetime of
> >  >  another one. Very simple formalisms can easily get computationally intractable
> >  >  once you start building in such conditions into the semantics.

-----------  ~oo~  --------------
Paolo Missier -,
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK

Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2012 11:45:01 UTC