F.7:11 - Worked example and application sketches
Section 11.1 supplies exact source bases for one contrast row. Sections 11.2–11.5 show further applications; complete their source-local claims, relations and evidence before treating them as finished tables.
F.7:11.1 - Actor wording across BPMN and PROV
| Comparison or use | Exact entries | Relation | Boundary | Basis | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Choose a plain-language heading for a teaching paragraph | BPMN 2.0.2 §9.3.1 Participant: a Collaboration element representing a PartnerEntity, PartnerRole, or both. PROV-O, 30 April 2013, §3.1 prov:Agent: something responsible for an activity, an entity’s existence, or another agent’s activity. | None asserted; this is a contrast row. | BPMN’s representation within a Collaboration and PROV’s responsibility meaning remain distinct. | BPMN 2.0.2 §9.3.1, p. 113; PROV-O §3.1; each term is interpreted within that cited source scheme. | Use Parties in the comparison as this paragraph’s heading, then retain the two source-specific sentences. This explanatory heading asserts no common kind, identity or substitutability. |
F.7:11.2 - Runtime occurrence comparison
| Comparison or use | Exact entries | Relation | Boundary | Basis | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Report selected PLC task runs as provenance activities | IEC task-execution claim; PROV Activity claim | A stated source-local semantic or representation relation, direction IEC → PROV, when actually established | PROV omits scan-cycle and scheduling semantics | F.9 or the direct representation pattern plus evidence | Report only the covered occurrence facts; do not infer that every PROV Activity is an IEC task run. |
Performed-Work attribution remains an A.15.1 and F.6 claim about actual Work and system-role assignment. The table supplies neither.
F.7:11.3 - Measured value and target
| Comparison or use | Exact entries | Relation | Boundary | Basis | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Judge an observed service characteristic against a target | SOSA observation and its result; ISO quantity value if used; ITIL service target | Measurement, scale, and unit relations; F.9 only for a genuine local-meaning relation | Composite KPI, sampling, and unit limits | C.16, A.10, B.3, and F.12 | Compare only the named characteristic, population, and window with adequate evidence. |
F.7:11.4 - Class inclusion and FCA order
A contrast row may show OWL class inclusion, FPF subtype, and FCA concept order together while stating that FCA order is not class inclusion. A positive relation between the first two is still a separate claim with its own semantics and evidence.
F.7:11.5 - Role trigger word
Show NIST RBAC role as a permission grouping and a local system-role-kind claim as a kind whose instances are Systems. Mark them distinct subjects. Use E.10.ROLE to recover other uses such as relation participation or signature position; do not assign them one senseFamily merely because the spelling matches.