Re: Qualified Involvements proposal from Paul Groth on 2011-11-07 (public-prov-wg@w3.org from November 2011)

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:37:18 +0100
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4EB7A6CE.7000300@vu.nl>

Hi Tim, all:

This is a really nice proposal. I think very consistent and seems fairly 
easy to explain.

I was wondering if one has to assert unqualified involvement or can that 
be inferred from the qualified involvement pattern?

cheers,
Paul

Timothy Lebo wrote:
> prov-wg,
>
> The following link reflects the OWL group's discussions from the past week about replacing EntityInRole with qualified involvements.
>
> Please have a read.
>
> If you'd like to join our Monday noon US ET (we switched our clocks today) skype discussions, please let me and Satya know.
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Qualifed_Involvements_in_PROV-O
>
> Regards,
> Tim Lebo

--

Received on Monday, 7 November 2011 11:25:25 UTC