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

Re: IVPT (invariant view or perspective on thing)

From: Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 12:55:02 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTinby=5UciNVe_t30TnhGFik85M_Zg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: Paul Groth <pgroth@gmail.com>, Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Luc,
Will the definitions on this page be distinct from those on
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptProcessExecution?

Thanks.

Best,
Satya

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>wrote:

> A page to list terms:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/TerminologyProposals
>
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science
> University of Southampton
> Southampton SO17 1BJ
> United Kingdom
>
> On 9 Jun 2011, at 17:37, "Paul Groth" <pgroth@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Graham,
> >
> > I had proposed the term "snapshot" for IVPT on another thread.
> >
> > I don't know what you/others thing of that.
> >
> > cheers,
> > Paul
> >
> > Daniel Garijo wrote:
> >> I totally agree with you.
> >> Best,
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >> 2011/6/9 Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org <mailto:GK@ninebynine.org>>
> >>
> >>    While I live with the term IVPT as a way to allow us to move our
> >>    discussions forward, I think it would be horrible if it actually
> >>    ended up in any of the documents we produce.
> >>
> >>    I'm not asking for any change now, just giving notice that I
> >>    expect us to settle on a better term when we can see better what
> >>    we're talking about and what we actually need to say.
> >>
> >>    #g
> >>    --
> >>
> >>    Jun Zhao wrote:
> >>
> >>        Dear all,
> >>
> >>        To bootstrap the development of the model task force, Satya,
> >>        Paolo, Khalid and I put together a document [1] highlighting
> >>        issues and goals to focus on during the F2F1.
> >>
> >>        The document is not meant to be definitive. It should be
> >>        updated and evolved as discussions raised in the mailing list.
> >>        We hope this document could help with setting expectation for
> >>        the F2F1 and guidance on the near focus of the WG.
> >>
> >>        [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Model_Proposal
> >>
> >>        Best regards,
> >>
> >>        Jun
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2011 16:55:31 GMT

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