PROV-ISSUE-338: explain prov:agent vs. prov:hadPlan naming convention [PROV-O HTML]

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 13:55:35 +0000 Message-Id: <E1SHF4B-0001Ry-Ia@tibor.w3.org> To: public-prov-wg@w3.org · This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:07:03 GMT

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/338

Raised by: Timothy Lebo
On product: PROV-O HTML

http://www.w3.org/mid/EMEW3|2c084c78f3361c61dff318d0c8aad9d6o339EE08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F7C02D3.7090705@ecs.soton.ac.uk

Hi prov-o team,

Just one more thoughts that came up when reading the primer.

Looking at the following snippet:

ex:correct prov:qualifiedAssociation [
              a Association ;
              prov:agent   ex:edith ;
              prov:hadPlan ex:corrections
          ] .

it is strange to see prov:hasPlan, why not simply prov:plan (and similarly
for other hadXXX properties).

Cheers,
Luc