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

Re: vocabulary simplification: two proposals to vote on [deadline, Oct 26 midnight, GMT]

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:07:02 +0000
To: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EMEW3|174726468ad6fd28f57b90adb37fc338n9PK7608L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|9C3E2DE2-4C96-4AB5-A8B0-90E170662094@ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On 26 Oct 2011, at 19:36, "Stephan Zednik" <zednis@rpi.edu<mailto:zednis@rpi.edu>> wrote:

On Oct 22, 2011, at 11:29 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:

PROPOSED: in section 2.1 [1], to define an entity as an identifiable
characterized thing.


PROPOSED: to rename 'process execution' by 'activity'


Activity has well-known broad definitions that do not hold to the constraints we are placing on this concept, primarily, that it occurred in the past.

Which constraints? Can you list them in the document?

A process execution, as a concept outside prov-dm, does not imply the past.
It's prov-dm that constraints PEs to be in the past. It can do the same for activity.


Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 19:07:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:03 UTC