- From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:04:34 +0000
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
PROV-ISSUE-182 (TLebo): stronger name for "wasAssociatedWith" [prov-dm] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/182 Raised by: Timothy Lebo On product: prov-dm There was a reasonable support for renaming "wasAssociatedWith" to something with "a bit more meaning" that has not been reflected in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#dfn-activity-association The thread started at http://www.w3.org/mid/CDFD3D2D-6354-4618-BB05-B541B84DC5EB@ISI.EDU Jim Myers suggested "bearsResponsbilityFor" at http://www.w3.org/mid/3131E7DF4CD2D94287870F5A931EFC230299C0F8@EX14MB2.win.rpi.edu Stephan Zednick suggests that "wasAssociatedWith" was too generic, by asking how it differed from "hadParticipation" in http://www.w3.org/mid/79C82866-807A-4FE0-8F60-90F7CAD955B0@rpi.edu and further argues for its weakness at http://www.w3.org/mid/4662AC25-B5A6-485D-9A7E-5180558AF724@rpi.edu I agree but didn't send anything to the list. Luc said we can raise issues against it (now?) http://www.w3.org/mid/EMEW3|f3b02401dcbcf60c395672bf886e967fnAKKN808L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|446DD0D9-0A95-4307-A7CB-43B55111CF83@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Received on Saturday, 3 December 2011 01:04:40 UTC