- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:48:56 +0200
- To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Cc: Sam Coppens Ugent <sam.coppens@ugent.be>, Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Tim,
I think there's an editor's choice here. I can make a suggestion (put
the diagram first). But in the end I think the editors will need to
just make a call.
Thanks
Paul
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
> Sam (and WG),
>
> I am getting conflicting suggestions for the ordering in section 3.3.
>
> At least someone has suggested one of {table, example, diagram} to go first, so we can't please everyone.
>
> I'm not sure how to resolve this.
>
> The current order of https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/Overview.html#description-qualified-terms is:
>
> * intro with one abstract pattern
> * tables of all abstract patterns
> * transition that ties tables to illustrations to cross reference (with two abstract examples)
> * two concrete examples
> * two abstract examples
> * diagram of all abstract patterns.
> * four concrete examples
>
> Any discussion welcome.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
>
> On Jul 9, 2012, at 5:15 PM, Sam Coppens Ugent wrote:
>
>> Section 3.3: Qualified Terms
>>
>> I would consider putting the example before the two tables listing the properties that can be qualified. This makes the section easier to read and to understand, otherwise you get the tables right away and get lost in them.
>
>
--
--
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group
Artificial Intelligence Section
Department of Computer Science
VU University Amsterdam
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2012 20:49:25 UTC