ISSUE-632: Should PROV-AQ be renamed


Should PROV-AQ be renamed

Accessing and Querying Provenance
Raised by:
Graham Klyne
Opened on:
This was a question asked of reviewers at the last review round. Most were OK with the current name, but this from Luc:

Is the name provenance access and query appropriate for the document?

No. Access yes, query very very little, ping back (if too stay in
document) not reflected.

I would go for "provenance access and services"

I think "provenance access and services" is a reasonable title, but this change will make work for other editors. IS IT WORTH THE EFFORT?

I also note that the parts of text have been updated to emphasize the querying nature of the services.

I am anticipating that Stian's proposed change to the Pingback will make it look far more like an access mechanism.
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. [PROV-AQ] ISSUE-632: Should PROV-AQ be renamed (from on 2013-03-11)
  2. PROV-AQ responses to Luc's review (from on 2013-03-11)
  3. PROV-ISSUE-632 (PROV-AQ-rename): Should PROV-AQ be renamed [Accessing and Querying Provenance] (from on 2013-02-26)

Related notes:

Proposing no further change. The pingback changes make it more of an access/discovery mechanism than something entirely new.

Graham Klyne, 7 Mar 2013, 15:17:02

No further objections, and the provenance REC track documents have been released with reference to the current name. Propose no change.

Graham Klyne, 25 Mar 2013, 16:02:08

Display change log ATOM feed

Chair, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <>.
$Id: 632.html,v 1.1 2013-06-20 07:37:57 vivien Exp $