FPF Reference

    F.0.1:9.1 Enactment × Provenance — process vs activity

    Preface node heading:f-0-1-9-1-enactment-provenance-process-vs-activity:71749

    What this page is

    This is generated FPF reference text from the specification preface or supporting sections. It helps interpret FPF; it is not FPF Reference product documentation.

    Methodology

    Use it to understand how the specification wants to be read, then return to a route, pattern, or work packet for active work. Cite generated IDs only when the wording changes the task decision.

    Content

    • Context A: BPMN_2_0 - Business Process Model and Notation v2.0 (2011) - design SenseCell⟨process@BPMN⟩: Tech “process”; Plain “workflow process”; Gloss “graph of flow nodes/events executed by participants.”

    • Context B: PROV_O_2013 - W3C PROV‑O (2013) - run SenseCell⟨activity@PROV⟩: Tech “activity”; Plain “provenance activity”; Gloss “time‑bounded occurrence using/generating entities.”

    • Bridge: ⟨process@BPMN⟩ ↔⟨design‑spec‑of, CL=2, loss: “no concurrency semantics in trace”; fit: “maps to execution plan”⟩ ⟨activity@PROV⟩

    • Concept‑Set hint: No same‑row nomination (relation ≠ near‑equiv); instead, record a design↔run linkage.

    Last Updated: 2026-06-17 — upstream FPF commit 646b0b9b (github.com/ailev/FPF)