- From: Miles, Simon <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 18:15:18 +0100
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Sure, if you know you're going to fix it :) Dr Simon Miles Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK +44 (0)20 7848 1166 Transparent Provenance Derivation for User Decisions: http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1400/ ________________________________________ From: Timothy Lebo [lebot@rpi.edu] Sent: 06 July 2012 18:10 To: Miles, Simon Cc: Provenance Working Group Subject: Re: PROV-ISSUE-445 (wasGeneratedAtTime): Erroneous wasGeneratedAtTime [PROV-O HTML] I forgot to mention that this issue is closed pending review. May it be closed, Simon? Thanks, Tim On Jul 6, 2012, at 12:50 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > Simon, > > Thanks for catching this. > The prov-o team will be validating all examples against the ontology as we work towards the final recommendation, so we'll find any other inconsistencies, too. > > I'm wondering if "was" should be included in the datatype property names, for consistency. > Their occurrence in the examples seems to suggest that it is the more natural naming. > > -Tim > > > On Jul 6, 2012, at 12:28 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > >> PROV-ISSUE-445 (wasGeneratedAtTime): Erroneous wasGeneratedAtTime [PROV-O HTML] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/445 >> >> Raised by: Simon Miles >> On product: PROV-O HTML >> >> Some examples in the current PROV-O document contain >> prov:wasGeneratedAtTime >> when it should be >> prov:generatedAtTime >> >> There are 4 instances. >> >> Thanks, >> Simon >> >> >> >> > > >
Received on Friday, 6 July 2012 17:20:45 UTC