- From: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:48:09 +0000
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Dear all, > it looks for to me. I meant to say it looks good to me. Sorry for the mistyping :( > > Unless someone objects, I am planning to close the issue on Monday. This still stands! > > -- 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 14:48:44 UTC