- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:08:45 +0000
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
I realised I sent this to the wrong mailing list. So sending it again. Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom Begin forwarded message: From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> Date: 25 October 2012 10:15:34 GMT+01:00 To: <public-prov-comments@w3.org<mailto:public-prov-comments@w3.org>> Subject: activity delegation (ISSUE-522) Dear all, In response to the further feedback on ISSUE-522, I have extended our response to this issue, as follows. (see http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-522_.28Activity_Delegation.29) It is true that, in a delegation, activity is optional. The reviewer suggests "Therefore, it is possible to state that one agent is the delegate of another, irrespective of any activity. This delegation likely is not indefinite, however, and is bounded by some context (e.g., time, role within an organization, etc). It should be possible to describe the bounds of the delegation.". But it is not the intended semantics: * PROV constraints defines the semantics of optional arguments, and specifically, in Table 3, explains that activity in delegation is expandable. * It means that an absent activity can be replaced by an existential variable. Hence, * actedOnBehalfOf(ag2,ag1) really means that agent ag2 acted on behalf of agent ag1 in the context of some unspecified activity. Some activity, not all activity. * This (unspecified) activity defines the bounds of the delegation. If these bounds need to be made explicit, than an activity also needs to be made explicit. Feedback welcome, Luc On 10/25/2012 12:39 AM, Freimuth, Robert, Ph.D. wrote: * 1.1.25 ISSUE-522 (Activity Delegation)<http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-522_.28Activity_Delegation.29> * There were two parts to my comment. First, agents can be either entities or activities. Does delegation apply to only those agents that are entities, or can activity-agents also delegate? * Second, the definition of delegation includes only the delegate and responsible agents; activity is optional. Therefore, it is possible to state that one agent is the delegate of another, irrespective of any activity. This delegation likely is not indefinite, however, and is bounded by some context (e.g., time, role within an organization, etc). It should be possible to describe the bounds of the delegation. This might be done using user-defined attributes, but interoperability would suffer without some guidance within the spec. * -- 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<mailto:l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2012 10:10:03 UTC