- From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 15:25:49 -0400
- To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
> [Tatiana Vieira] > Hi people, > Supose I have the following process: > > process H > Split > A: split B and C > D: split E and F > > In this case, could process C, for instance, receive as input parameter, a value from process E or F? Without a formal semantics for Owl-S processes, it's not absolutely clear, but I believe the answer is Yes. An interpreter for the language should wait until such values are available before proceeding with the steps that consume them. -- -- Drew McDermott Professor, Computer Science Department Yale University Completely irrelevant linguistic postscript: The word "doubt" as used by Vieira here is not standard English, but it seems to be gaining rapidly in popularity. The correct standard word is "question," as in "I have a question about parameter data flow." But the version "I have a doubt about ..." seems to be quite normal in Indian English, and it's beginning to be copied to places such as far-off Brazil. Which reminds me of "allows to X," whose meaning is clear, in spite of being ungrammatical; it should be "allows us to X" or "allows one to X." I predict this will be perfectly good English very soon, given that it allows to drop a useless word. Just one doubt: Does this locution come from German? Or is it the general case in Indo-European languages? [Please don't reply to this part of the message, at least not to the mailing list! My questions (or doubts) are purely rhetorical!]
Received on Friday, 8 July 2005 19:28:24 UTC