- From: Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be>
- Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 13:39:46 +0100
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+=hbbe4fe=zV5pSYkgtc=-CGxzwEFXSE8a9qzqS_4O+z+7-Ng@mail.gmail.com>
my apologies, this was for a different issue. Please ignore the previous email. 2013/3/22 Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be> > The editors agree with this comment. > > The proposed resolution is to add the constraint > IF hadMember(d, e) and 'Dictionary' \in typeOf(d) THEN > hadDictionaryMember(d, e, "k") with k and unknown key > to PROV-Dictionary. > > If any members of the WG have an objection to this, we ask kindly to > inform us by replying to this email. If no objections are received before > Tuesday March 26th, we will assume this resolution is accepted, > > - Tom > > > 2013/3/7 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> > >> PROV-ISSUE-642 (TomDN): Include example of provenance of a dictionary in >> the document [PROV-DICTIONARY] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/642 >> >> Raised by: Tom De Nies >> On product: PROV-DICTIONARY >> >> Originally raised by Paul, who would like to see a small example of the >> provenance of a dictionary in the document to illustrate the spec. We >> should do this by the final release. >> >> >> >> >
Received on Friday, 22 March 2013 12:40:16 UTC