- From: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 09:25:31 +0100
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
May I suggest to rename "Ordering of Processes" to "Ordering of process executions". It may be longer as an expression, but is clearer. khalid On 27/07/2011 08:15, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Paul and Satya, > Correct. Furthermore, Paolo and I didn't have time to go through this > section yet. So, it's very rough! > Luc > > On 07/27/2011 07:51 AM, Paul Groth wrote: >> Hi Satya, >> >> The editors took latitude in defining the model for purposes of >> consistency that's probably the explanation for the divergence >> >> Can you suggest your definition reformulated against the current >> document. >> >> Thanks >> Paul >> >> On Jul 27, 2011, at 3:51, Provenance Working Group Issue >> Tracker<sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> PROV-ISSUE-50 (Ordering of Process): Defintion for Ordering of >>> Process [Conceptual Model] >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/50 >>> >>> Raised by: Satya Sahoo >>> On product: Conceptual Model >>> >>> I am not sure where did we get the currently listed definition of >>> "Ordering of Process" - it is neither listed in the original >>> provenance concept page [1] nor in the consolidated concepts page [2]. >>> >>> I had proposed the following definition: >>> "Ordering of processes execution (in provenance) needs to be modeled >>> as a property linking process entities in specific order along a >>> particular dimension (temporal or control flow)" >>> >>> [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptOrderingOfProcesses >>> [2] >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConsolidatedConcepts#Ordering_of_process_execution >>> >>> >>> >
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 08:26:06 UTC