- From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 08:45:49 +0000
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
PROV-ISSUE-517: Data Model Sections 5.2.2 and 5.2.3 [prov-dm] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/517 Raised by: Luc Moreau On product: prov-dm http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Sections_5.2.2_and_5.2.3 ISSUE-463 The semantic distinction between revision and quotation is not clear. To a computer, a document that contains content from another could have been created through either revision or quotation. If these types are to be part of the spec they should be defined more clearly as users arbitrarily choosing one type over another will hinder interoperability. I might suggest that "revision" be used to describe the logical lineage of an entity, whereas "quotation" would pull content from an entity in a different lineage; however, this still isn't completely precise as it requires a common interpretation of how to define "lineage".
Received on Monday, 10 September 2012 08:45:50 UTC