- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 13:36:30 -0400
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Thanks, Luc. I closed it and will raise a new issue if I find it during the next review. Regards, Tim On Mar 28, 2012, at 11:50 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > 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 17:37:21 UTC