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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm]

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 09:02:06 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPRnXtkCK6VS4hwveWK1+-VJhL_fK5VHfgXJssBVBFmDGR8ofA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Cc: Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>, public-prov-wg@w3.org
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
> "quoted" parallels "taken" conceptually.

or "took", if your mind is implying an agent. In my mind, "quoted" is
more like "cited", but then I'm not a native English speaker.

We normally consider agents doing quoting than paragraphs.

Stian quoted the bible, and so the bible 'was quoted'. "Has this
document been quoted anywhere?"  The "From" is the spanner in the
works, it tries to change the directionality, and I understand the
phrase "was quoted from", but when you see it there in the RDF and
it's not something as easy as a paragraph and a bible, but a blogpost
and a tweet, then you can't really be sure.


> And breaking the "wasDerivedFrom" pattern seems like a bad idea as we're trying to finish up with a more consistent model, not less.

I agree to not fracture the model. I was just hoping for a small
modification to clarify the direction, like "wasQuoteFrom". I think
that is more important than if it is still a quote or not.


-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2012 08:03:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 16 May 2012 08:03:03 GMT