- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 12:25:48 +0100
- To: Tim Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- CC: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Just added. On 06/14/2012 12:18 PM, Tim Lebo wrote: > 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 11:26:28 UTC