W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > June 2012

Re: ISSUE-385: hasProvenanceIn: finding a solution

From: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 07:46:25 +0100
Message-ID: <4FCC59C1.60407@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
On 04/06/2012 03:14, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>> I can see the point about trying to reuse the relation between the PAQ
>> and the dm.
> Unfortunately, I'm behind on the PAQ. But perhaps it's become required reading for the hasProvenanceIn decisionů

I'd say not.  I think any hasProvrenanceIn should stand independently of 
PROV-AQ.  Then, of the semantics (or lack of) are OK, PROV-AQ could use it, 
otherwise a different term.

Received on Monday, 4 June 2012 07:10:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:15 UTC