W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > February 2013

Re: question on constraint 47 (3) - wasAssociatedWith-ordering

From: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 15:54:17 +0000
Cc: pgroth@gmail.com, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1DAEA900-DCC1-45D6-B829-1538BD74AF66@inf.ed.ac.uk>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
Hi all,

I have added a remark summarizing this discussion just after constraint 47.  I propose to close this issue since the remark should address it.  Please let me know by Monday if further discussion is needed.

--James


On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> OK, we can revise the text.  ISSUE-615 created.
> 
> For the typing constraint, constraint 50 applies:
> 
>  wasEndedBy(end2; ag,_e2,_a2,_t2,_attrs2)  implies 'activity' in type(ag)
> likewise,
>  wasGeneratedBy(gen1; ag,_a1,_t1,_attrs1)  implies 'entity' in type(ag)
> 
> Luc
> 
> 
> 
> On 01/16/2013 10:02 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>> Hi Luc,
>> 
>> I just figured that out as well. :-) 
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> Two things
>> - maybe this should be made clear in the text? by some comments in the rules.
>> - I also wonder if there should be a typing constraint in the head of the rule to say that agent must be an agent or an entity for the cases to apply.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Paul
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>> 
>> Constraint 47 is looking at the ordering constraints between
>> an activity a and an agent ag, considering
>> - ag is an entity (cases 1 and 2)
>> - ag is an activity (cases 3 and 4)
>> 
>> Case 3 says that the agent (an activity) must have ended after the start of
>> the activity a, ensuring some overlap between the two.
>> 
>> Luc
>> 
>> 
>> On 01/16/2013 09:44 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>> Can someone clarify the following in the spec (Constraint 47 - 3)
>>> 
>>> IF wasAssociatedWith(_assoc; a,ag,_pl,_attrs) and wasStartedBy(start1; a,_e1,_a1,_t1,_attrs1) and wasEndedBy(end2; ag,_e2,_a2,_t2,_attrs2) THEN start1 precedes end2.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From my reading, this is saying that the start of activity a, must happen after the end of activity, a2 if the the agent, ag, ended activity a2.
>>> 
>>> This doesn't make sense to me. An agent can  potentially end one activity and start another...
>>> 
>>> Can someone clarify this for me?
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> Paul
>> 
>>  -- 
>> 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
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 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
> 


The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Friday, 8 February 2013 15:54:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:30 UTC