Re: ISSUE-385: hasProvenanceIn: finding a solution from Paul Groth on 2012-06-04 (public-prov-wg@w3.org from June 2012)

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 11:23:28 +0300
To: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAJCyKRrR-YctpmGsZk5TFazPZc-q6NVq0ku=d+GX+eOJzop4sQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi All,

It seems that we have a choice between two options with respect to
hasProvenanceIn:

1) do not include the relation at all
2) include a qualified version of hasProvenanceIn

Obviously, naming of the relation can change

Can I get a show of hands from the group just to see which is
currently looked best upon.

Thanks
Paul

Received on Monday, 4 June 2012 08:23:58 UTC