- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 08:08:10 -0400
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Stian, On Oct 25, 2012, at 8:00 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: > … > > I think we've done a lot on the way. For instance PROV-O starts with > http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#description-starting-point-terms - a > simple and easy explanation to Entity/Activity/Agent. But then, > instead of detailing those > (http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#cross-reference-starting-point-terms) we > move on to Expanded Terms, and then finally Qualified Terms. Perhaps > if we reversed the list it would be more sensical? Kind of like TOC: > > 1. Introduction > 2. PROV-O at a glance > 3 Starting Point Terms > --3.1 Ontology Description > --3.2 Cross reference > 4 Expanded Terms > --4.1 Ontology Description > --4.2 Cross reference > 5 Qualified Terms > --5.1 Ontology Description > --5.2 Cross reference > A. PROV-O OWL Profile > B. Names of inverse properties > C. Acknowledgements > D. References > D.1 Normative references > D.2 Informative references > > > What do you think of this idea? (Did we try something like that > earlier, Khalid/Tim/Jun ? ) > > I think this reordering would be satisfactory if not slightly better. If others think that it would be better, we can give it a try. Regards, Tim
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2012 12:08:11 UTC