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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-396: Rename "wasRevisionOf" to "revisedFrom"? [prov-dm]

From: Tim Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 07:18:46 -0400
Message-Id: <B84E685C-2B4A-47F1-A335-8E72443F8D8C@rpi.edu>
Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Maybe it can be a review question.

Tim



Sent from my iPad

On Jun 14, 2012, at 3:05, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi Tim and Paul,
> 
> I don't see a consensus emerging on this issue.
> I keep it raised, for now, while we proceed to
> the internal review.
> 
> Cheers,
> Luc
> 
> On 05/06/12 04:06, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>> Or perhaps "wasRevisedFrom" to suit the was* naming convention.
>> 
>> -Tim
>> 
>> On Jun 4, 2012, at 11:00 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> 
>>   
>>> PROV-ISSUE-396: Rename "wasRevisionOf" to "revisedFrom"? [prov-dm]
>>> 
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/396
>>> 
>>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>>> On product: prov-dm
>>> 
>>> DM editors,
>>> 
>>> Could wasRevisionOf be renamed to "revisedFrom" ?
>>> 
>>> I think it follows the "wasDerivedFrom" naming a little more closely.
>>> 
>>> The Involvement "Revision" (and qualfiedRevision) could remain the same.
>>> 
>>> I think that this naming is a little more natural.
>>> 
>>> (yes, this is phrased in terms of PROV-O, but an issue on DM; probably best product would be mapping prov-dm<->   prov-o...)
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tim
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>     
>> 
>>   
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 11:19:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:16 UTC