- From: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:29:43 +0100
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi, I don't understand the summary of the issue. The original question seemed (to me) to not be about qualification at all, but about whether PROV-CONSTRAINTS ensures that the two different ways of giving the start time of an activity match. It already does this for PROV-DM (via constraints 29 and 30). For PROV-O, since we have not specified anything about how PROV-DM maps to PROV-O or vice versa, I don't see anything that needs to change here. If we were to specify how PROV-CONSTRAINTS mapped to OWL, then we would want to ensure that the translation of the constraints 29 and 30 gives the expected inference, but I believe we just resolved not to specify that. This issue seems to have been raised three times accidentally (555 and 556 are identical); perhaps the duplicates can be closed. --James On Sep 17, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-554 (time-qualification): public comment: should qualfied and unqualified versions the same [prov-dm-constraints] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/554 > > Raised by: Paul Groth > On product: prov-dm-constraints > > This is a public comment: see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2012Sep/0002.html for full details > > > > -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2012 09:30:18 UTC