Re: PROV-ISSUE-30 (name-for-bob): What name do we use for the BOB construct? [Conceptual Model]

No, this issue goes deeper... we need more than a mere alpha conversion, IMO.  I 
think we need to eliminate the free variable named "bob".

I do intend to read the draft and try and figure a proposal, but focusing on 
deckchair-rearranging doesn't really help.

I'd like to see this issue dropped until a more substantive approach can be 
proposed.  You did say that issues raised against document should ideally come 
with proposals for alternatives, no?

#g
--

Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-30 (name-for-bob): What name do we use for the BOB construct? [Conceptual Model]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/30
> 
> Raised by: Luc Moreau
> On product: Conceptual Model
> 
> How do we call the construct referred to as BOB.  "BOB" was introduced as a placeholder at F2F1. Before F2F1, we use to refer to it as thing.
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 21 July 2011 21:59:56 UTC