- From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 13:54:14 +0100
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: Tim Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi all, This issue is now close. Luc On 14/06/12 12:25, Luc Moreau wrote: > Just added. > > On 06/14/2012 12:18 PM, Tim Lebo wrote: >> Maybe it can be a review question. >> >> Tim >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Jun 14, 2012, at 3:05, Luc Moreau<L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: >> >> >>> Hi Tim and Paul, >>> >>> I don't see a consensus emerging on this issue. >>> I keep it raised, for now, while we proceed to >>> the internal review. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Luc >>> >>> On 05/06/12 04:06, Timothy Lebo wrote: >>> >>>> Or perhaps "wasRevisedFrom" to suit the was* naming convention. >>>> >>>> -Tim >>>> >>>> On Jun 4, 2012, at 11:00 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> PROV-ISSUE-396: Rename "wasRevisionOf" to "revisedFrom"? [prov-dm] >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/396 >>>>> >>>>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo >>>>> On product: prov-dm >>>>> >>>>> DM editors, >>>>> >>>>> Could wasRevisionOf be renamed to "revisedFrom" ? >>>>> >>>>> I think it follows the "wasDerivedFrom" naming a little more closely. >>>>> >>>>> The Involvement "Revision" (and qualfiedRevision) could remain the same. >>>>> >>>>> I think that this naming is a little more natural. >>>>> >>>>> (yes, this is phrased in terms of PROV-O, but an issue on DM; probably best product would be mapping prov-dm<-> prov-o...) >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 12:54:47 UTC