Re: PROV-ISSUE-115 (Tlebo): prov:preceded should be replaced with prov:followed [Formal Model]

Sounds good to me.
Best,
Daniel

2011/10/5 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>

>
> PROV-ISSUE-115 (Tlebo): prov:preceded should be replaced with prov:followed
> [Formal Model]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/115
>
> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
> On product: Formal Model
>
> All other predicates are pointing from the newer rdfs:Resource to the older
> rdfs:Resource (e.g. prov:wasDerivedFrom).
>
> This "backwards looking" paradigm makes sense because we need to describe
> newer things in terms of the older things sitting around.
>
> prov:preceded is inconsistent with this paradigm, as it "looks forwards" to
> the newer one, which may not exist yet.
>
> I recommend we REPLACE prov:preceded with prov:followed and reverse the
> definition. To keep the ontology trim, we should leave the definition of
> prov:followed's inverse to an extension.
>
>
>
>