W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > May 2012

Re: provenance of provenance

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 10:52:07 -0400
Cc: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8B6D3BF6-0D59-4E06-BA36-3DC2F7B8B2E8@rpi.edu>
To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>

On May 11, 2012, at 3:50 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:

> My recollection is that we said we'd stay with the name "Accounts", but without the more involved account semantics.  

This is what I recall.
"Bundle" was just the intermediary name while the group shifted its concept.


> Do I mis-remember or was there a conscious decision to change the name?

I don't recall any group decision on the naming we would use.
I'm happy with either name. My concern is its definition and modeling.

-Tim


> 
> #g
> --
> 
> On 10/05/2012 22:14, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> We are seeking feedback on text regarding bundles (allowing provenance
>> of provenance to be expressed).
>> 
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd6-bundle.html
>> 
>> It is addressing ISSUES-257, ISSUE-260, ISSUE-88, ISSUE-297.
>> We will respond to these issues individually, shortly.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Luc
>> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 11 May 2012 14:52:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 11 May 2012 14:52:41 GMT