- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:31:59 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Jun, I am not understanding your question. The decisions so far are listed here: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/AgreementOnConcepts Regarding "process", which page do you refer to? Thanks, Luc On 06/14/2011 12:03 PM, Jun Zhao wrote: > Hi Luc, > > Are we removing the optional part about duration? > > Also, the concept page also mentions "process". To me, this seems like > a terminology issue. Are we going to eliminate the use of process or > are we going to have a separate discussion? > > cheers, > > Jun > > > On 14/06/11 11:45, Paul Groth wrote: >> Hi All: >> >> In trying to move towards a definition of process execution, it would be >> good to get the groups consensus on the notion of process execution >> being in the past. Namely, the following is proposed from the last >> telecon: >> >> "A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is >> occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of >> a process execution is always in the past." >> >> Can you express by +1/-1/0 your support for this proposal via a response >> to this email message? >> >> The due date for responses is this Thursday before the telecon. >> >> Thanks, >> Paul >> > > -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2011 12:32:36 UTC