--- a/model/satya-comments-issue-101.txt	Mon Nov 07 11:14:50 2011 +0000
+++ /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
@@ -1,66 +0,0 @@
-  > Hi, My review comments for Section 5.2.2 Process Execution in the
-  > current version of the conceptual model document:
-  > 
-  > Similar to issue with Entity, why are defining Process Execution
-  > expression?
-
-We now define records. Terminology 'record' has been (hopefully
-consistently) used across the whole document.
-
-  > 
-  > 1. The activity that a process execution expression is a
-  > representation of has a duration, delimited by its start and its end
-  > events; hence, it occurs over an interval delimited by two
-  > events. However, a process execution expression need not mention time
-  > information, nor duration, because they may not be known.
-  > 
-  > Issue: Is it possible that event information, similar to time
-  > information, may not be known? Is it possible to define a PE without
-  > having knowledge about its start and end events and also its duration
-  > (delimited by events)?
-
-Yes, in fact, we don't assert the start/end events.
-
-  > 
-  > 2. Further characteristics of the activity in the world can be
-  > represented by other attribute-value pairs, which must also remain
-  > unchanged during the activity duration.
-  > 
-  > Issue: If we have an attribute value for pe1: status = executing at t1
-  > and status = stopped at t2, would it violate the above constraint? If
-  > yes, we need to rethink the above constraint.
-
-Simply, this should not be seen as attribute, since this is its status
-at given instants.  It does not hold for the PE's whole duration.
-
-  > 
-  > 3. contains a set of attribute-value pairs [ attr1=val1, ...],
-  > representing other attributes of this activity that hold for its all
-  > duration.
-  > 
-  > Issue: Not sure what the above statement means by "for all its
-  > durations" (typo) - are we referring to characterizing attributes (for
-  > the PE) or any attribute of the PE?
-
-Changed to: For its WHOLE duration
-
-  > 
-  > 4. A process execution expression is not an entity expression. Indeed,
-  > an entity expression represents a thing that exists in full at any
-  > point in its characterization interval, persists during this interval,
-  > and preserves the characteristics that makes it
-  > identifiable. Alternatively, an activity in something that happens,
-  > unfolds or develops through time, but is typically not identifiable by
-  > the characteristics it exhibits at any point during its duration.
-  > 
-  > Issue: This is a re-phrasing of the "continuant" and "occurrent"
-  > definition from the Basic Formal Ontology [1] (proposed by me in email
-  > thread on PROV-ISSUE-66 [2]). I think we should cite BFO with this.
-
-Yes, this is a concept from philosophy, W. E. Johnson, Logic: Part III (1924)
-Extra citation added, referrring to the book.
-
-  > 
-  > [1]BFO: www.ifomis.org/bfo/1.1
-  > [2]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Aug/0038.html
-  >