- From: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:06:45 +0200
- To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Cc: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAExK0DcRCnxSD=6sre-wVzYCb=yy7=Jst__8s5mpovvZ5bwktA@mail.gmail.com>
+1 2012/10/25 Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> > +1 > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>wrote: > >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> Another good point. >> >> I propose to change the sentence as follow: >> >> there must be some underpinning* activity or* activities performing the >> necessary action*(s)* resulting in such a derivation >> >> Luc >> >> On 10/25/2012 12:39 AM, Freimuth, Robert, Ph.D. wrote: >> >> 1.1.15 ISSUE-516 (DerivationAsBundle)<http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-516_.28DerivationAsBundle.29> >> Section 5.2.1 states, "there must be some underpinning activities >> performing the necessary actions resulting in such a derivation". Note >> both "activities" and "actions" are plural. The statement wasDerivedFrom, >> however, allows only a single activity to be specified. Is derivation >> intended to support multiple activities (as per the text), and if so, are >> multiple statements necessary (one for each activity)? The question about >> derivation as a bundle was based on the impression that multiple activities >> might be part of "a derivation" (as per the text). >> >> >> -- >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > -- > Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) > http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ > Assistant Professor > - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group | > Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science > - The Network Institute > VU University Amsterdam >
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2012 10:07:17 UTC