- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:04:02 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Dear all, Apologies in getting the prov-constraints document ready. It is now available for review at http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/releases/ED-prov-constraints-20120723/prov-constraints.html It would be great if we can still follow the timetable we agreed on the call last week. Regards, The prov-c-team On 20/07/12 12:02, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-459 (prov-constraints-lc-review): PROV-CONSTRAINTS review [prov-dm-constraints] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/459 > > Raised by: James Cheney > On product: prov-dm-constraints > > Hi, > > This issue is to capture review comments for the next draft of PROV-CONSTRAINTS, which will be released soon. > > Please answer the following review questions: > > 1. Is PROV-CONSTRAINTS ready to be released as a last call working draft (modulo editorial issues and resolution to the below issues)? > > 2. Regarding ISSUE-346: Is the role, meaning, and intended use of each type of inference or constraint clear? (http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/346) > > 3. Regarding ISSUE-451: Are there any objections to the revision-is-alternate inference? (http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/451) > > 4. Regarding ISSUE-454: Are the rules for disjointness clear and appropriate? (http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/454) > > 5. Regarding ISSUE-458: Should influence (and therefore all subrelations, including communication) be irreflexive, or can it be reflexive (i.e., can wasInfluencedBy(x,x) be valid)? (http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/458) > > 5. Are there any objections to closing other open issues on PROV-CONSTRAINTS? They are: > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/387 > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/394 > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/452 > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/453 > > 6. Are there any new issues concerning definitions, constraints, or inferences? If so, please raise as new issues to be addressed before LC vote, ideally with a suggested change that would address the issue. > > > --James > > > >
Received on Monday, 23 July 2012 14:05:10 UTC