- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 14:20:52 -0400
- To: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <D01594D0-BAB7-48EA-A553-1354DE99CA11@rpi.edu>
On Jul 18, 2012, at 1:59 PM, James Cheney wrote: > There seemed to be no consensus for adding an inference from specialization to tracedTo. > > Since then, tracedTo has been removed and instead we have (non-transitive) wasInfluencedBy. > > I presume that there is also no consensus for adding an inference from specialization to wasInfluencedBy, +1 -Tim > and have marked the issue closed. I expect further concerns about adding or removing inferences to be raised as new issues. > > --James > > On Jun 22, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Satya Sahoo wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> The constraints document allows for tracedTo to be inferred from derivation and attribution. Should the following also hold: >> >> specialization(e2,e1) >> implies >> tracedTo(e2,e1) >> >> I don't see any reason for inferring tracedTo from specialization - I agree with Khalid's interpretation of tracedTo that links one entity to another if the first entity played a role in generation of the second entity. >> >> Specialization is very different (at least according to current defn. in DM) - specialization(car, vehicle). This clearly does not mean that car is tracedTo vehicle. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Best, >> Satya >> >> >> Luc >> >> >> >> > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 18:21:23 UTC