W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > December 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-184: Section 2.1.2 (PROV-DM version as on Nov 28th) [prov-dm]

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 06:22:55 +0100
Message-ID: <CB883107-A542-485F-BD06-8705D859C049@vu.nl>
CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
To: Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu>
Hi Jim

Can you give an alternative proposal for the name for what is currently called event?

Thanks
Paul

On Dec 9, 2011, at 0:52, Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu> wrote:

> I have some of the same concerns as Satya around the idea of wasGeneratedBy, used, et al. being described as instantaneous events. 
> 
> 1) The use of an entity and generation of an entity are not instantaneous things (although they can be recorded as such), but are things that occur through time.
> 
> 2) Calling these things events results in the sort of confusion that we are seeing from Satya. The Activity is the event, and should therefore be called Event.
> 
> 3) Relying on terminology from process algebra is fine for people who are familiar with it, but we want to provide that sort of theoretical foundation to those who are not familiar with those term uses, and would find the distinction between "event" and "activity" less then helpful.
> 
> 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, 9 December 2011 05:23:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:04 UTC