- From: Austin Tate <a.tate@ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:13:18 +0100
- To: Terry Payne <trp@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org, Daniel Elenius <daele@ida.liu.se>
At 14:40 17/06/2004 +0100, Terry Payne wrote: >The challenge here is to infer profiles that can drive discovery from >simple processes. This is an unresolved problem, partially because of the >related nonfunctional parameters that are only ever specified in the >profile. If these apply to all processes in the process model, then one >could associate them to the simple process (in question); however, if the >nonfunctional parameters were process specific (something we don't >represent right now), then should they be considered...??? This is a good point. The profile should ONLY be thought of as a specification of something else. Something that exists or something you want to be produced/created for you. So any properties that are unique to the profile would appear to be out of place. Austin
Received on Friday, 18 June 2004 04:11:02 UTC