- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 16:50:07 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Tim, We have revisited the prov-n grammar, and addressed this concern. See examples for generation http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-n.html#expression-Generation The intuitive rule is: - use '-' for an absent argument. - drop it, if there is no ambiguity. I am closing this issue, pending review. Luc On 02/06/2012 09:52 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-243 (TLebo): how to interpret ASN assertions with incomplete arity? > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/243 > > Raised by: Timothy Lebo > On product: > > wasGeneratedBy is defined as arity 5. > > The DM asserts in a rule (I've changed the variables): > > wasGeneratedBy(a,b,c) > > is c a(n) 1) Activity 2) Time 3) attribute-values? > > The answer is intended to be 3), but it is clearly ambiguous without context. > > I propose to include parameter omissions explicitly in ASN statements: > > wasGeneratedBy(a,b,[],[],c) > > Thanks, > Tim > > > > > > > -- 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
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2012 15:50:57 UTC