- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 08:13:25 -0400
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On Aug 16, 2012, at 5:50 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: > > On Aug 14, 2012, at 19:38 , Timothy Lebo wrote: > >> After some updating, prov:Source and prov:qualifiedSource appear only in the comment log. >> They have been replaced with prov:PrimarySource and prov:qualifiedPrimarySource, respectively in the examples and ontology. >> >> I have marked this issue as PENDING-REVIEW. >> >> >> >> Procedural question (that should become reflected in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Tracking_Public_Comments ) >> >> Should this now be raised at our weekly meeting, for WG approval to respond to the commenter? > > Yes, I believe a WG approval for the essence of the response is good to have (and good to be documented). The editorial part can of course be left to the one responsible for that particular comment. Great. Thanks, Ivan. I've marked them PENDING-REVIEW at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Tracking_Public_Comments. And I need them to go onto the next agenda. Regards, Tim
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2012 12:13:54 UTC