- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 11:24:54 -0400
- To: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Jun, On Jul 4, 2012, at 5:42 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Jun, > >> >> 5.3.5 >> >> - The example of in this section does not quite help me: 1) I don't think W3C should be attributed to the DM document, but our editors; unless I understand attribution wrong; and 2) can we have an example to show that influence must be used, and cannot be replaced by any other concepts. In my opinion such an example is key to illustrate the purpose of this concept. >> > > As W3C is the publisher of the document, it's not unreasonable to use attribution for this. > (The example already indicates the document is attributed to editors/authros). I think that attributing W3C and the editors/authors is acceptable. The distinction that I think is leading to your concern can be made with: :luc_the_editor prov:actedOnBehalfOf :w3c . :paolo_the_editor prov:actedOnBehalfOf :w3c . Regards, Tim
Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2012 15:25:21 UTC