- From: Miles, Simon <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:09:46 +0000
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hello WG, Please find the proposed response to Chuck Morris here: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-616 thanks, Simon Dr Simon Miles Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK +44 (0)20 7848 1166 Transparent Provenance Derivation for User Decisions: http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1400/ ________________________________________ From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker [sysbot+tracker@w3.org] Sent: 23 January 2013 17:57 To: public-prov-wg@w3.org Subject: PROV-ISSUE-616 (quoted-in-primer): Confusing use of wasQuotedFrom in primer [Primer] PROV-ISSUE-616 (quoted-in-primer): Confusing use of wasQuotedFrom in primer [Primer] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/616 Raised by: Simon Miles On product: Primer Public comment from Chuck Morris: "I just looked over the provenance primer. One thing I noticed is that the wasQuotedFrom relationship is very confusing semantically. Take the example in the primer where Betty posts a blog entry with a quote from the newspaper article. The provenance is expressed as (ex:blogEntry prov:wasQuotedFrom ex:article .) But that seems to imply that the blog entry was quoted by the newspaper article instead of the other way around. I suggest that a better name for the relationship would be prov:hadQuotationFrom." Original mail: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2013Jan/0006.html
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2013 18:10:27 UTC