- From: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:25:34 +0000
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Tim, it looks for to me. Unless someone objects, I am planning to close the issue on Monday. -- Jun On 16/03/2012 14:21, Timothy Lebo wrote: > > On Mar 16, 2012, at 6:27 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > >> PROV-ISSUE-328 (jhao): prov:wasStartedBy and prov:wasEndedBy as the core provenance terms [PROV-O HTML] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/328 >> >> Raised by: Jun Zhao >> On product: PROV-O HTML >> >> This is a sub-property of prov:wasAssociatedWith. >> >> Should it keep it as one of the core terms or as an additional term. > > "It is a subproperty or subclass" seems to be a reasonable rule to place it into "additional". > > This way, "additional" category becomes something more like "specific". > >> >> I vote for it to be as a core. > > I updated http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o to reflect them in "additional" to see how it looks. > Can you take a look? > >> >> The same should be applied to prov:wasEndedBy. >> >> I think the decision should also be consistent with how we are going to treat all the subclasses of prov:Agent. > > I agree that these two should be consistently applied. > > Regards, > Tim > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
Received on Friday, 16 March 2012 14:26:03 UTC