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

Re: Definitions and provenance and invariance

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:30:14 +0100
Message-ID: <4DFF91B6.1040404@ninebynine.org>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Luc Moreau wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Following comments, I have tried to simplify the definitions of 'thing' 
> and 'IVP of'  further.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Further_simplification 

+1

#g
--

> 
> 
> What do you think? If we are happy with this simplification, we should 
> try to
> get a coherent set of definitions for Generation/Use/Derivation.
> 
> Best regards,
> Luc
> 
> 
> On 06/20/2011 02:42 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>>>> From this I'm not sure if "dynamic resource" is useful as a
>>> classification, I would go for Luc's view (and our accepted
>>> definition) that invariance is just a relation [...]
>>
>> This would appear to be a consensus!
>>
>> #g
>>
>>
> 
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 21:48:21 GMT

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