- From: Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:39:13 +0200
- To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Cc: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+=hbbcbOTNQDbwhGZmpNobyLpEaYpz12C977OX1mFCDzVYSsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Indeed, I think we should make clear in the response that the constraints are defined over PROV-DM, not PROV-O or any other specific implementation. If one were to implement a validator for PROV-O, the suggested constraints would be used for the qualified relations. - Tom 2012/9/18 Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> > Hi James, > > Sorry I may have misunderstood the question but if we can write a > clear response that would be good. > > Also, apologies for the extra issues, my computer did some crazy > things when I was making the issue last night. I'll close them. > > Thanks > Paul > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:29 AM, James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk> > wrote: > > 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.htmlfor full details > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2012 13:39:48 UTC