- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 10:52:07 -0400
- To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On May 11, 2012, at 3:50 AM, Graham Klyne wrote: > My recollection is that we said we'd stay with the name "Accounts", but without the more involved account semantics. This is what I recall. "Bundle" was just the intermediary name while the group shifted its concept. > Do I mis-remember or was there a conscious decision to change the name? I don't recall any group decision on the naming we would use. I'm happy with either name. My concern is its definition and modeling. -Tim > > #g > -- > > On 10/05/2012 22:14, Luc Moreau wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> We are seeking feedback on text regarding bundles (allowing provenance >> of provenance to be expressed). >> >> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd6-bundle.html >> >> It is addressing ISSUES-257, ISSUE-260, ISSUE-88, ISSUE-297. >> We will respond to these issues individually, shortly. >> >> Cheers, >> Luc >> > >
Received on Friday, 11 May 2012 14:52:40 UTC