W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > June 2012

Re: Contextualization ---> Optional bundle in Specialization

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:12:13 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|c051872e7dbdde49d877ad4d9864c1c1o5RDCE08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4FEC4A1D.9010104@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
CC: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>, Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Let's not play with words.
We made it clear that any "The descriptions in a bundle allow an entity 
to be interpreted in domain-specific manner".
So this interpretation is not part of PROV.

The only thing we want in PROV is to be able to define a specialization 
where an additional aspect is fixed: a bundle (which is another entity).


On 06/28/2012 12:30 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
> On 28/06/2012 09:26, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> The rated agent tool:Bob-2011-11-16 is generated after the tool has 
>> processed
>> the contents of ex:run1.
>> In that case, the syntax, by this I mean the bundle, is part of the 
>> semantics.
> Eek!  This sounds like pure non-sense to me.
> How can syntax be part of semantics?  The nearest I can think of is 
> Herbrand interpretations, but I can't see that applying here.  You 
> can't even start to go there without having a syntactic and 
> corresponding semantic structure to start with.
> #g
> -- 

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
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2012 12:12:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:16 UTC