public-prov-wg@w3.org from April 2012 by author

Cresswell, Stephen

• RE: PROV-ISSUE-320 (dgarijo): Change the name of prov:Quotation (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-277 (TLebo): Supporting property chains [Ontology] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-277 (TLebo): Supporting property chains [Ontology] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• RE: is specializationOf transitive or not? (Monday, 2 April)

Curt Tilmes

• Review prov-aq document (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Primer WD2 ready for review (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 release of prov-dm for review (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 release of prov-dm for review (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Best practice for specialization (Monday, 2 April)

Daniel Garijo

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-320 (dgarijo): Change the name of prov:Quotation (Thursday, 19 April)
• [owl changed] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-339 (dgarijo): Domain of "activity" property [Ontology] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-226 (dgarijo): domain of the qualifiedDelegation property? [Ontology] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: ISSUE-83: Express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-277 (TLebo): Supporting property chains [Ontology] (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-317 (dgarijo): the domain of hadRole includes Derivation [Ontology] (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-318 (dgarijo): Collections missing [Ontology] (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-319 (dgarijo): Domain of hasAnnotation [Ontology] (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-320 (dgarijo): Change the name of prov:Quotation (Sunday, 8 April)
• PROV-O issues pending review (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: prov-wg: Telecon Agenda April 4, 2012 (Wednesday, 4 April)

Deborah L. McGuinness

• Re: is specializationOf transitive or not? (Monday, 2 April)

Eric

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-250 (TLebo): respond to Eric's comments [Ontology] (Wednesday, 18 April)

Eric Stephan

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-128 (Location-Example): Location example uses a filesystem and not a geographical location [Ontology] (Sunday, 29 April)

Graham Klyne

• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 26 April)
• File:// URIs (was: Datatype property for used) (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Review Prov-AQ document (Thursday, 26 April)
• Changes applied to PROV-AQ in response to reviews (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Review prov-aq (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Review prov-aq document (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 (review-dm-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm wd5 [prov-dm] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: prov-wg: Telcon Agenda April 19, 2012 (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-277 (TLebo): Supporting property chains [Ontology] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Monday, 9 April)
• TAG discussion may be relevant to PROV-CONSTRAINTS (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-333 - feedback on PROV-CONSTRAINTS (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Sunday, 8 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-333 - feedback on PROV-CONSTRAINTS (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Saturday, 7 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: is specializationOf transitive or not? (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Best practice for specialization (Tuesday, 3 April)

James Cheney

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 18 April)
• revised prov-dm-constraints (Tuesday, 17 April)
• warning: hg merging (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-333 (review-prov-dm-constraints-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm-constraints wd5 [prov-dm-constraints] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-332 (review-prov-n-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-n wd5 [prov-n] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-332 (review-prov-n-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-n wd5 [prov-n] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-333 (review-prov-dm-constraints-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm-constraints wd5 [prov-dm-constraints] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 (review-dm-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm wd5 [prov-dm] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Monday, 9 April)
• Different senses of specialization (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)

Jim McCusker

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Fwd: prov:specializationOf (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-347 (review-provo-luc): feedback from Luc on prov-o WD [prov-n] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-223 (definition-of-entity): What is the definition of entity [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)

Jun Zhao

• Re: actions related to collections (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: prov-wg: Telcon Agenda April 19, 2012 (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-312 (TLEBO): acknowledge developers of tools used to create PROV-O HTML [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-347 (review-provo-luc): feedback from Luc on prov-o WD [prov-n] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: release of prov-dm, prov-dm-constraints, and prov-n for review (Monday, 9 April)

Khalid Belhajjame

• [prov-o] Examples (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: release of prov-dm, prov-dm-constraints, and prov-n for review (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: release of prov-dm, prov-dm-constraints, and prov-n for review (Monday, 9 April)

Luc Moreau

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Problem accessing PROV-O documentation (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Fwd: Going for simplicity (was: actions related to collections) (Monday, 30 April)
• prov-wg meeting minutes 2012-04-26 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 26 Apr 2012 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: revised prov-dm document (ISSUE-331) (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-365 (membership-as-insertion-too-limitting): Collection constraint membership-as-insertion too limitting [prov-dm-constraints] (Wednesday, 25 April)
• PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 26 Apr 2012 (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-340 (start-by-activity-is-comm): Start by Activity is Communication; drop it. [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-205 (optional-activity-in-generation-record): optional activity in generation record [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-356 (replace-hadquoter): Replace hadQuoter by reusing wasAttributedTo [mapping prov-dm <-> prov-o] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-205 (optional-activity-in-generation-record): optional activity in generation record [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-204 (end-of-entity): What marks the end of an entity? [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• invalidation is in prov-dm (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: entity invalidation (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Primer revised for release (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-351 (membership-complete): memberOf complete attribute missing [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: [owl changed] Re: prov-o html - for voting tomorrow (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: prov-o html - for voting tomorrow (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Collections: issue-136 and issue-137 (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-207 (start and end records): start and end records [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 18 April)
• entity invalidation (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-133 (YolandaGil): Producing and delivering resources as part of provenance in Provenance Data Model (PROV-DM) Draft [Data Model] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-132 (YolandaGil): Improve the examples to make them more intuitive and of broader appeal in Provenance Data Model (PROV-DM) Draft [Data Model] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-148 (WasScheduledAfter): wasScheduledAfter definition is difficult to understand (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-182 (TLebo): stronger name for "wasAssociatedWith" [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-206 (agent-asserted-not-inferred): agents should not be inferred, and wasAssociatedWith should also work with entities [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-219 (prov:label): label attribute is required in PROV [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-238 (TLebo): order relation sections to suit a natural traversal of the Relation table [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-249 (two-derivations): Why do we have 3 derivations? [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• revised prov-dm document (ISSUE-331) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• ACTION-70 (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-117 (general-comments-on-formal-model-document): General Comments On Ontology Document [Formal Model] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-347 (review-provo-luc): feedback from Luc on prov-o WD [prov-n] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-347 (review-provo-luc): feedback from Luc on prov-o WD [prov-n] (Friday, 13 April)
• prov-wg meeting minutes 2012-04-12 (Friday, 13 April)
• actions related to collections (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 12 Apr 2012 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Today's prov-o team telecon (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 (review-dm-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm wd5 [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-341 (revision-approver): revision approver - why? [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 12 Apr 2012 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 (review-dm-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm wd5 [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-340 (start-by-activity-is-comm): Start by Activity is Communication; drop it. [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-341 (revision-approver): revision approver - why? [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Today's prov-o team telecon (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Primer WD2 ready for review (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Primer WD2 ready for review (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-223 (definition-of-entity): What is the definition of entity [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-223 (definition-of-entity): What is the definition of entity [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-223 (definition-of-entity): What is the definition of entity [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• release of prov-dm, prov-dm-constraints, and prov-n for review (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-242 (TLebo): generated twice? [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-224 (unified-prov-namespace): Can we use a single namespace for the PROV family of specs? [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-242 (TLebo): generated twice? [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• is specializationOf transitive or not? (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Sunday, 1 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Sunday, 1 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Sunday, 1 April)

Miles, Simon

• RE: actions related to collections (Saturday, 21 April)
• RE: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: Primer revised for release (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: entity invalidation (Thursday, 19 April)
• Primer revised for release (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-319 (dgarijo): Domain of hasAnnotation [Ontology] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-332 (review-prov-n-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-n wd5 [prov-n] (Wednesday, 4 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-336 (provo-2WD-feedback): Incorporate WG feedback into PROV-O 2WD [Ontology] (Wednesday, 4 April)
• RE: Primer WD2 ready for review (Wednesday, 4 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-336 (provo-2WD-feedback): Incorporate WG feedback into PROV-O 2WD [Ontology] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-223 (definition-of-entity): What is the definition of entity [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• RE: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Primer WD2 ready for review (Sunday, 1 April)

Olaf Hartig

• Re: Review prov-aq (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 26 Apr 2012 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Review Prov-AQ document (Monday, 23 April)
• Review prov-aq (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: prov-aq issues resolved (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 12 Apr 2012 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 12 Apr 2012 (Thursday, 12 April)

Paolo Missier

• Call for participation: SWPM 2012: The Third International Workshop on the role of Semantic Web in Provenance Management (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-365 (membership-as-insertion-too-limitting): Collection constraint membership-as-insertion too limitting [prov-dm-constraints] (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-332 (review-prov-n-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-n wd5 [prov-n] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• responsibility and association (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Today's prov-o team telecon (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Primer WD2 ready for review (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Primer WD2 ready for review (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Primer WD2 ready for review (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Tuesday, 3 April)

Paolo Ncl

• Re: is specializationOf transitive or not? (Monday, 2 April)

Paul Groth

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-368 (no-responsibility-in-derivation): No responsibility in derivation [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Special issue on Geoscience Data Provenance (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Fwd: Going for simplicity (was: actions related to collections) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-128 (Location-Example): Location example uses a filesystem and not a geographical location [Ontology] (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-366: Approving agent in a qualified wasRevisionOf [Ontology] (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-366: Approving agent in a qualified wasRevisionOf [Ontology] (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Fwd: Please help: prov-o examples (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• prov-wg Telecon minutes April 19, 2012 (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-356 (replace-hadquoter): Replace hadQuoter by reusing wasAttributedTo [mapping prov-dm <-> prov-o] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: invalidation is in prov-dm (Friday, 20 April)
• prov-wg F2F4 in Lyon? (Wednesday, 18 April)
• prov-wg: Telcon Agenda April 19, 2012 (Wednesday, 18 April)
• presentation at LDOW (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: responsibility and association (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: [provo-html] PROV-ISSUE-119 (vanilla-rdf): How does vanilla RDF work with PROV Ontology [Formal Model] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Today's prov-o team telecon (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-333 - feedback on PROV-CONSTRAINTS (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Monday, 9 April)
• Review of PROV-O - ISSUE-336 (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331: feedback on PROV-Dm WD5 (Friday, 6 April)
• prov-wg: Minutes of the 05 April 2012 Telecon (Thursday, 5 April)
• addressing issues in prov-aq (Thursday, 5 April)
• prov-aq issues resolved (Thursday, 5 April)
• New PROV-AQ editor's draft available (Thursday, 5 April)
• prov-wg: note on sending reviews and comments on them (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Wednesday, 4 April)
• prov-wg: Telecon Agenda April 4, 2012 (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-223 (definition-of-entity): What is the definition of entity [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Sunday, 1 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Sunday, 1 April)

Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker

• PROV-ISSUE-370 (tracedTo-inference-only): Should tracedTo be moved to prov-constraints and be defined as a binary relation that can be inferred [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-369 (drop-startByActivity): Should we drop wasStartedByActivity? [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-368 (no-responsibility-in-derivation): No responsibility in derivation [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-367 (hadActivity-domain-and-comments-unclear): prov:hadActivity domain and usage unclear [Ontology] (Thursday, 26 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-366: Approving agent in a qualified wasRevisionOf [Ontology] (Wednesday, 25 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-365 (membership-as-insertion-too-limitting): Collection constraint membership-as-insertion too limitting [prov-dm-constraints] (Wednesday, 25 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-364 (collection-constraints-bugs): Collection constraint has wrong syntax for memberOf [prov-dm-constraints] (Wednesday, 25 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-363 (prov-value-pun): prov:value punned on KeyValuePair and Entity's literal value [Ontology] (Friday, 20 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-362 (altOf-www): alternateOf is to handle levels of specificity, not the wild wild west of WWW URI selection [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-361 (definition target-uri): no relationship between resource and provenance information in definition of target-uri [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (Friday, 20 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-360 (SPARQL example for 5.1.3): SPARQL example for obtaining provenance information directly [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (Friday, 20 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-359 (provenance query service URI): Avoid the term "provenance query service URI" [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (Friday, 20 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-358 (web resource): Avoid using the term "Web resource" in PAQ [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (Friday, 20 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-356 (replace-hadquoter): Replace hadQuoter by reusing wasAttributedTo [mapping prov-dm <-> prov-o] (Thursday, 19 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-355 (convenient-notation-for-qualified-names): introduce a convenience notation for qualified names [prov-n] (Thursday, 19 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-354 (all-or-nothing-for-optional-arguments): Adopt an all-or-nothing approach to optional positional arguments [prov-n] (Thursday, 19 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-353 (optional-id-syntactic-marker): Introduce a syntactic marker for when optional id is expressed [prov-n] (Thursday, 19 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-351 (membership-complete): memberOf complete attribute missing [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-350 (xref-with-unions): cross references with union domains fail [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 16 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-349 (prov-o-html-egs): examples for each term in cross-reference section [PROV-O HTML] (Sunday, 15 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-348 (prov-o-propery-name-conventions): maintain property naming conventions [Ontology] (Saturday, 14 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-347 (review-provo-luc): feedback from Luc on prov-o WD [prov-n] (Friday, 13 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-346 (distinguish-constraints): types of constraints unclear [prov-dm-constraints] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-345 (delineate-constraints): style hinders readability: constraints not separated clearly enough [prov-dm-constraints] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-344 (jzhao): Missing definitions of terms in section 4 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-343 (account-objections): Objections regarding Account [prov-dm-constraints] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-341 (revision-approver): revision approver - why? [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-340 (start-by-activity-is-comm): Start by Activity is Communication; drop it. [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-339 (dgarijo): Domain of "activity" property [Ontology] (Monday, 9 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-338: explain prov:agent vs. prov:hadPlan naming convention [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 9 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-337 (agent-and-entity): agent should not be a subclass of entity [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-336 (provo-2WD-feedback): Incorporate WG feedback into PROV-O 2WD [Ontology] (Monday, 2 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-335 (provo-html-code-style): use <code> and <a href="#Entity> consistently. [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 2 April)
• PROV-ISSUE-334 (define-qualification-pattern): Qualification Pattern was used, used in bold font in its first occurrence, but never defined. [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 2 April)

runnegar@isoc.org

• RE: Primer revised for release (Thursday, 19 April)

Sam Coppens

• Review Prov-AQ document (Friday, 20 April)

Satya Sahoo

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-277 (TLebo): Supporting property chains [Ontology] (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 (review-dm-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm wd5 [prov-dm] (Thursday, 12 April)

Stephan Zednik

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-338: explain prov:agent vs. prov:hadPlan naming convention [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 30 April)
• Problem accessing PROV-O documentation (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-366: Approving agent in a qualified wasRevisionOf [Ontology] (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-366: Approving agent in a qualified wasRevisionOf [Ontology] (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-367 (hadActivity-domain-and-comments-unclear): prov:hadActivity domain and usage unclear [Ontology] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)

Stian Soiland-Reyes

• Going for simplicity (was: actions related to collections) (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-366: Approving agent in a qualified wasRevisionOf [Ontology] (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Collections: issue-136 and issue-137 (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-136 (collection-functional): Collection not stated as functional [Data Model] (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-137 (collection-isolation): Collection assertions does not guarantee isolation [Data Model] (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-356 (replace-hadquoter): Replace hadQuoter by reusing wasAttributedTo [mapping prov-dm <-> prov-o] (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-356 (replace-hadquoter): Replace hadQuoter by reusing wasAttributedTo [mapping prov-dm <-> prov-o] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-123 (hadParticipant-subprops): prov:used and prov:wasControlledby should be subproperties of prov:hadParticipant (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-314 (TLEBO): inconsistent comment location in PROV-O HTML cross referencing [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Sunday, 1 April)

Ted Thibodeau Jr

• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: entity invalidation (Thursday, 19 April)

Timothy Lebo

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-368 (no-responsibility-in-derivation): No responsibility in derivation [prov-dm] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [owl changed] ISSUE-83: Express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology (Monday, 30 April)
• prov-o meeting agenda (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [prov-html] PROV-ISSUE-308 (prov-o-w3c-style): PROV-O HTML much conform to W3C Style [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-366: Approving agent in a qualified wasRevisionOf [Ontology] (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-340 (start-by-activity-is-comm): Start by Activity is Communication; drop it. [prov-dm] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: conforming prov-o to W3C style guidelines (Thursday, 26 April)
• conforming prov-o to W3C style guidelines (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: revised prov-dm document (ISSUE-331) (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: ACTION-70 (Thursday, 26 April)
• [owl changed] Re: PROV-ISSUE-367 (hadActivity-domain-and-comments-unclear): prov:hadActivity domain and usage unclear [Ontology] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: tracker down? (Thursday, 26 April)
• [owl changed] Re: PROV-ISSUE-367 (hadActivity-domain-and-comments-unclear): prov:hadActivity domain and usage unclear [Ontology] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-367 (hadActivity-domain-and-comments-unclear): prov:hadActivity domain and usage unclear [Ontology] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Thursday, 26 April)
• tracker down? (Thursday, 26 April)
• [owl changed] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: [prov-o] Examples (Monday, 23 April)
• [owl changed] Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Monday, 23 April)
• prov-o team telecon Monday 23 April 2012 (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-128 (Location-Example): Location example uses a filesystem and not a geographical location [Ontology] (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-340 (start-by-activity-is-comm): Start by Activity is Communication; drop it. [prov-dm] (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: Please help: prov-o examples (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-341 (revision-approver): revision approver - why? [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Friday, 20 April)
• [owl changed] Re: PROV-ISSUE-205 (optional-activity-in-generation-record): optional activity in generation record [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: revised prov-dm document (ISSUE-331) (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-205 (optional-activity-in-generation-record): optional activity in generation record [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• [owl changed] Re: invalidation is in prov-dm (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-356 (replace-hadquoter): Replace hadQuoter by reusing wasAttributedTo [mapping prov-dm <-> prov-o] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-357 (author-in-quotation): author in definition of quotation [prov-dm] (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-352 (rename-WasQuotedFrom): A better name for wasQuotedFrom [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-311 (clarify-optionals): Clarify optional arguments in DM [prov-dm] (Thursday, 19 April)
• [owl changed] Re: prov-o html - for voting tomorrow (Wednesday, 18 April)
• prov-o html - for voting tomorrow (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: actions related to collections (Wednesday, 18 April)
• css help - prov-o html (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• [owl changed] Re: ISSUE-83: Express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-314 (TLEBO): inconsistent comment location in PROV-O HTML cross referencing [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: warning: hg merging (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-320 (dgarijo): Change the name of prov:Quotation (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: ACTION-70 (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: prov-o meeting today (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-312 (TLEBO): acknowledge developers of tools used to create PROV-O HTML [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 16 April)
• prov-o meeting today (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-250 (TLebo): respond to Eric's comments [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-128 (Location-Example): Location example uses a filesystem and not a geographical location [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-117 (general-comments-on-formal-model-document): General Comments On Ontology Document [Formal Model] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: [provo-html] PROV-ISSUE-119 (vanilla-rdf): How does vanilla RDF work with PROV Ontology [Formal Model] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-222 (used-objectproperty): Datatype property for used? [Ontology] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Sunday, 15 April)
• Please help: prov-o examples (Sunday, 15 April)
• [owl changed] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-347 (review-provo-luc): feedback from Luc on prov-o WD [prov-n] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-319 (dgarijo): Domain of hasAnnotation [Ontology] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-332 (review-prov-n-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-n wd5 [prov-n] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Today's prov-o team telecon (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-341 (revision-approver): revision approver - why? [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 (review-dm-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm wd5 [prov-dm] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Today's prov-o team telecon (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Fwd: PROV-O: Review Sam Coppens (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-333 (review-prov-dm-constraints-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm-constraints wd5 [prov-dm-constraints] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-331 (review-dm-wd5): issue to collect feedback on prov-dm wd5 [prov-dm] (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Today's prov-o team telecon (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-339 (dgarijo): Domain of "activity" property [Ontology] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-226 (dgarijo): domain of the qualifiedDelegation property? [Ontology] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Today's prov-o team telecon (Monday, 9 April)
• Today's prov-o team telecon (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-248 (string-as-entity): How to model strings? [Formal Semantics] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-226 (dgarijo): domain of the qualifiedDelegation property? [Ontology] (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-336 (provo-2WD-feedback): Incorporate WG feedback into PROV-O 2WD [Ontology] (Wednesday, 4 April)
• PROV-O ready for internal WG review - due 9 April. (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-335 (provo-html-code-style): use <code> and <a href="#Entity> consistently. [PROV-O HTML] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-242 (TLebo): generated twice? [prov-dm] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Best practice for specialization (Monday, 2 April)
• prov-o telecon 12 noon ET / 4pm GMT (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)

Tom De Nies

• Re: PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 26 Apr 2012 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 26 Apr 2012 (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Different senses of specialization (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Best practice for specialization (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: is specializationOf transitive or not? (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: PROV-ISSUE-29 (mutual-iVP-of): can two bobs be mutually "IVP of" each other [Conceptual Model] (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Best practice for specialization (Monday, 2 April)

Yolanda Gil

• Re: PROV-ISSUE-132 (YolandaGil): Improve the examples to make them more intuitive and of broader appeal in Provenance Data Model (PROV-DM) Draft [Data Model] (Wednesday, 18 April)

Last message date: Monday, 30 April 2012 19:28:40 UTC