- From: Deborah L. McGuinness <dlm@cs.rpi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:59:54 -0500
- To: <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
i have always included PML in both proof and trust since it had primitives for encoding both. i think it is fair to have PROV in proof - it does not provide everything to provide a complete proof but does certainly allow encoding of critical information to support proofs. Deborah On 11/15/2012 9:52 AM, Curt Tilmes wrote: > Figure 1 of this paper: > http://wiki.esi.ac.uk/w/files/9/94/Provenance2007.pdf > > groups provenance into proof.. > > Curt > > On 11/15/12 9:43 AM, Tim Lebo wrote: >> Are we 'proof'? A bit of a stretch... but I'll squint. >> >> Unifying logic is RIF? ( if so, that is behind too) >> >> -Tim >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Nov 15, 2012, at 0:45, Craig M Trim <cmtrim@us.ibm.com >> <mailto:cmtrim@us.ibm.com>> wrote: >> >>> Hi Folks, >>> >>> Not sure if this topic has come up before - but a quick search on the >>> email archives and I don't see it. >>> >>> Semantic Web Layer Cake: >>> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web_Stack >>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web_Stack> >>> >>> The illustration most of us are familiar with was created by Tim >>> Berners-Lee and is still evolving. >>> >>> I wonder if we can update the illustration to work the PROV spec into >>> the Trust and/or Proof layer? In the same way that other layers have >>> the same syntax ":<spec>" >>> >>> -Craig >>> > >
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2012 15:00:34 UTC