- From: Simon Miles <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:37:47 +0100
- To: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
0 (no objection to the proposal, but don't find 'expression' problematic either) Simon On 28 October 2011 15:33, Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk> wrote: > +1 > -Paolo > > On 10/28/11 3:17 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: > > Dear all, > > In the interest of simplification, we would like to make the following > proposal about terminology in prov-dm. > > The context: > > Following this week's call, the prov-dm document will introduce > concepts such as entity and activity in section 2, and define 'entity > expression' and 'activity expression' in section 5. In section 5 (see > table of contents of [1]), all terms of the data model have been > suffixed by the suffix 'expression', which allows us to distinguish > terms of the data model (i.e. what we say in provenance records) from > the things in the world. > > > The problem: > > While this distinction is important, the choice of word is not ideal. > The suffix 'expression' has a strong connotation of language, and the reader > may > think that we talk about expressions in the abstract syntax notation. > It's not the case! We really mean elements of the data model. > > Proposal: > Rename 'Entity Expression' into 'Entity Record'; similarly, rename 'XXX > Expression' into 'XXX Record'. > > Can you please express your support for this proposal by Wednesday > midnight GMT, and we will confirm it at the next teleconference. > > Luc > > [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html > > > > > -- > ----------- ~oo~ -------------- > Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org > School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, UK > http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier > -- Dr Simon Miles Lecturer, Department of Informatics Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK +44 (0)20 7848 1166
Received on Friday, 28 October 2011 14:38:16 UTC