Hi Tim, Yes this issue is old, and can be closed. My latest review on the internal document included all my concerns at the time. Thanks, Luc On 05/15/2012 09:43 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > Luc, > > There is a lot of discussion on the points you make, which are rather old. > Could you look over the original issues and point out any concerns that you still have? > > Otherwise, may we close this issue? > > Thanks, > Tim > > On Feb 27, 2012, at 9:03 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > > >> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 03:55, Timothy Lebo<lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: >> >> >>> Done. but Activities are durations, so prov:hadTemporalExtent could be >>> applied there. >>> I could use some help on that (Stephan, Satya, Stian?) >>> >> Activities, entities and involvements like Usage and Association have >> in a broad sense all durations. However DM only talks about activity >> durations, and the others have/are 'events', so we should keep the >> focus there for now, and rather raise it as a requirement to DM if we >> can think of a good use case. >> >> >> >>>> For the domain, Association and Delegation are different from other >>>> Involvements in that they are not expected to have time information, is this >>>> because we do not view them as instantaneous events? >>>> >>> I'd be curious to hear an answer to this. >>> >> I would assume they are non-empty durations in almost every use case. >> >> >> >> -- >> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team >> School of Computer Science >> The University of Manchester >> >> >> > -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavmReceived on Friday, 18 May 2012 16:25:42 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 18 May 2012 16:25:42 GMT