- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:10:50 +0200
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Well I think that characterized entity is really something that you introduced in the document. It's not really that common, thus, I don't think we need to replace it. I'm also fine with saying at the beginning of the document that we have brief intro descriptions that are then more explicitly restricted. Paul Luc Moreau wrote: > I suppose that if we follow this argument thoroughly, we should write: > > "Generation represents the creation of a new identifiable characterized entity by an identifiable activity." > > (We also have to do the same with Use ...) > > Definitions are becoming quite heavy ... thoughts? > > Luc > > On 07/23/2011 03:06 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> PROV-ISSUE-39 (generation-identifiable-activity): Generation should be defined as an identifable activity [Conceptual Model] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/39 >> >> Raised by: Paul Groth >> On product: Conceptual Model >> >> Currently, Generation is introduced as follows: >> >> "Generation represents the creation of a new characterized entity by an activity." >> >> However, the definition requires a reference to a process execution. Given that process execution is defined as an "identifiable activity", it would seem to be better to change the definition to: >> >> "Generation represents the creation of a new characterized entity by an identifiable activity." >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > -- Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth Assistant Professor Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group Artificial Intelligence Section Department of Computer Science VU University Amsterdam
Received on Monday, 25 July 2011 09:13:34 UTC