ISSUE-199: Section 6.2 (PROV-DM as on Dec 5)

Section 6.2 (PROV-DM as on Dec 5)

State:
CLOSED
Product:
prov-dm
Raised by:
Satya Sahoo
Opened on:
2011-12-07
Description:
Hi,
The following are my comments for Section 6.2 of the PROV-DM (as on Dec 5):

Section 6.2
1. "If wasDerivedFrom(e2,e1,a,g2,u1) holds, for some a, g2, u1, then tracedTo(e2,e1) also holds."

Comment: What information is lost if we verbatim replaced tracedTo with wasDerivedFrom in the above example?

2. "If wasDerivedFrom(e2,e1) holds, then tracedTo(e2,e1) also holds."

Comment: So, wasDerivedFrom and tracedTo as effectively interchangeable? If a domain-specific application can assert derivation to be transitive as described earlier in Section 5.3.3.2, then why is traceability required to be defined by the DM?

Thanks.

Best,
Satya
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. Re: closing old collection issues (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-03-28)
  2. Re: closing old collection issues (from satya.sahoo@case.edu on 2012-03-28)
  3. Re: closing old collection issues (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-03-28)
  4. Re: PROV-ISSUE-199: Section 6.2 (PROV-DM as on Dec 5) [prov-dm] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2012-03-23)
  5. Re: PROV-ISSUE-199: Section 6.2 (PROV-DM as on Dec 5) [prov-dm] (from L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk on 2011-12-08)
  6. PROV-ISSUE-199: Section 6.2 (PROV-DM as on Dec 5) [prov-dm] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2011-12-07)

Related notes:

No additional notes.

Display change log ATOM feed


Chair, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <w3t-sys@w3.org>.
$Id: 199.html,v 1.1 2013-06-20 07:37:27 vivien Exp $