Re: PROV-ISSUE-288 (TLebo): ProvRDF issues for Usage [mapping prov-dm <-> prov-o]

Hi Satya,
Then, the equivalent would be to make the entity of a usage optional 
(i.e. the object of involvement).
We can do it, if people feel it's appropriate.
Luc

On 06/03/2012 15:43, Satya Sahoo wrote:
> Hi Luc,
> The issue is about having activity id as optional for Generation and 
> not for Usage - this is distinct from id of the Generation and Usage 
> record id.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best,
> Satya
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk 
> <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     Generation and usage have both optional id:
>     http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#term-Generation
>     http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html#term-Usage
>
>     Luc
>
>
>     On 05/03/12 13:45, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>
>         PROV-ISSUE-288 (TLebo): ProvRDF issues for Usage [mapping
>         prov-dm<->  prov-o]
>
>         http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/288
>
>         Raised by: Satya Sahoo
>         On product: mapping prov-dm<->  prov-o
>
>             If activity id is optional for generation record, why is
>         it not so for usage record? These two points need to be
>         reconciled either way. (Satya)
>
>             Similar to generation, time can be "folded" into the
>         "attribute" list. (Satya)
>
>         http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF#Usage
>
>
>
>
>
>