- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 04:22:15 -0700
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Hi Graham, So at the F2F, we said that we would try to finish all Notes by November given that we need to ask for an extension to finish our recs. Did you have a different timeline in mind? My personal goal was to get all internal working group comments, issues and feature requests in with the next two weeks and then see what we can/want to do in the time remaining. Sorry, I should have coordinated a bit better with you on this. cheers Paul On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> wrote: > Other description languages are possible, and can be implemented. If anyone > really wants this, I'd suggest writing it up as a separate note. Otherwise I > think we'll run out of time, as it will be hard to know where to draw the boundary. > > #g > -- > > On 23/06/2012 20:10, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> ISSUE-434: Look at wadl or some other description language for the service - is it possible? do we have time? paq >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/434 >> >> Raised by: >> On product: >> >> >> >> >> >> > -- -- 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 Monday, 25 June 2012 11:22:47 UTC