- From: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>
- Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:21:11 -0500
- To: Simon Miles <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 18:22:02 UTC
Good points, and that's partly why I've softened on "activity". However, I still think we have a perfectly good word, "Event" that's being used as part of the model that doesn't actually inhere in any concrete representation. The DM uses "Event" in as much as it maps it to "Instantaneous Event", neither of which are represented in the formal model. I would much rather see another term for "instantaneous event", as events are things that occur, and if they occur in the world, they always have a start point and an end point. The definition of event that is currently implied by the DM isn't one that is shared by the world at large. It is the simplest, highest-level term that unambiguously describes an occurrent in our model. Jim -- Jim McCusker Programmer Analyst Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics Yale School of Medicine james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330 http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu PhD Student Tetherless World Constellation Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute mccusj@cs.rpi.edu http://tw.rpi.edu
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 18:22:02 UTC