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

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