Re: PROV-ISSUE-2: proposal to vote on - process execution in the past

0 - I'm happy to proceed with this as a working assumption, but remain 
unconvinced that it needs to be locked in to the overall model.


Paul Groth wrote:
> Hi All:
> In trying to move towards a definition of process execution, it would be 
> good to get the groups consensus on the notion of process execution 
> being in the past. Namely, the following is proposed from the last telecon:
> "A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is 
> occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of 
> a process execution is always in the past."
> Can you express by +1/-1/0 your support for this proposal via a response 
> to this email message?
> The due date for responses is this Thursday before the telecon.
> Thanks,
> Paul

Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2011 13:10:57 UTC