W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > August 2012

Re: PROV-ISSUE-469 (zero-timespan-entity): Can entity's have zero timespan? [prov-dm-constraints]

From: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 10:38:25 +0100
Cc: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <2F62DA1F-B98B-45E4-90DD-DF222F522F4F@inf.ed.ac.uk>
To: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
I have now done this and since there has been no further discussion, I assume the issue can be closed.

--James

On Aug 6, 2012, at 5:04 PM, James Cheney wrote:

> OK.  To resolve ISSUE-469, I will remove "strictly" in generation-precedes-invalidation.  Marked pending review.
> 
> --James
> 
> On Aug 6, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 4:35 PM, James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I think this is a typo; we meant for the only strict orderings to be the two involving derivation.
>>> Easy to fix by removing "strictly" if you agree.
>> 
>> I agree, although I would only keep the one about wasGen(e1) strictly
>> preceeding wasGen(e2) in the derivation, not the usage strictly
>> preceeding generation, which I see no reasoning for.
>> 
>> This is ISSUE-470.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
>> School of Computer Science
>> The University of Manchester
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
> 
> 
> 


-- 
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2012 09:38:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:19 UTC