- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:01:07 +0000
- To: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- CC: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
All, re: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/601 I've just applied an extensive series of edits to change "provenance information" to "provenance description". This was not a simple search and replace. In some cases I have simply used the term "provenance" when I judged that the use in context was not specific to one or more descriptions. It's possible there have been some knock-on changes I have missed. ... As of writing this, there are just three open issues remaining: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/414 (review use of MUST/SHOULD/etc) http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/597 (prov-aq OWL terms) http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/428 (provenance serialization MIME types) Issue 414 is a targeted review. Issue 597 affects the OWL definition, not the document. Issue 428 is awaiting feedback from the WG. All the remaining open issues - about 15 of them: see http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/5 - are now pending review. As such, I submit that the PROV-AQ text is now substantially complete, unless issue 428 throws up any major changes. #g --
Received on Monday, 26 November 2012 15:45:51 UTC