W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > June 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-2: towards a first proposal

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 08:00:14 +0100
Message-ID: <4DEF1DFE.1090600@ninebynine.org>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Luc Moreau wrote:
> Hence, before putting the following proposal to a formal vote, I would like
> to get a feel as to whether the proposal would get support, or whether
> it needs to be amended.
> 
> PROPOSED:
>   1. there is a distinction between process execution and process 
> specification/definition

+1

>   2. process specification/definition is referred to as recipe in the 
> charter and is out of scope for this WG

+1  (to the extent that that matches my intuition about these terms)

>   3. terminology needs to be agreed on

abstain - it's not clear to me the scope of terminology proposed.  From the 
above, I would say "process executon" and we're done.

#g
--
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 11:12:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:31 GMT