--- a/model/ACTIONS-04082011.txt	Thu Aug 04 11:10:10 2011 +0100
+++ b/model/ACTIONS-04082011.txt	Thu Aug 04 11:56:19 2011 +0100
@@ -3,18 +3,42 @@
 sec. 3
 
 * ISSUE-63: 
-  - avoid using terminology in 3.1 and introduce it starting 3.2
 
-* avoid explicit mentioning of time and replace with events in the example.
+- [LUC] 3.2: add a line for each construct to explain intuitively what its purpose is in the model
  
-fig .1
+fig .1  [PM]
 * add legenda to graphical example to explain notation / lines etc.
+* associate labels to agents to match the example
+* add pe0 to fig. 1 that generates e0 
+* [PM] add complete graphical notation conventions in Appendix
 
-fig. 2:  / timeline
+fig. 2:  / timeline  [PM]
   t      -> evt1
   t+1 -> evt2
   t+2 -> evt3
   t+3 -> evt4
    evt6:  a flag indicating that spell-checking was performed is added to the file, resulting in e6.
   t+4 -> evt5
- 
\ No newline at end of file
+
+ 
+
+sec. 4
+
+ISSUE-62:  
+
+* [LUC] we are defnining a data model. 
+  We offer an ASN to express assertions that conform to the data model, but a language will be needed to express instances of the model (ABox, KBase, DB....  term to be determined) but this language is likely to be out of scope of this spec.
+
+* we should shave a discussion on whether a formal notion of "validity" is appropriate and whether one can have a practical test for validity (without which, the notion becomes useless)
+
+sec. 5:
+
+5.2:  outcome is that PEs and entities are disjoint "classes".
+     ACTION (NOT ASSIGNED): explain why they are conceptually different.
+
+5.3: parked "role" issue: no linear reading is possible and the def. of role may need to be revised, but we don't have a good way of doing it just now.
+
+
+
+
+  
\ No newline at end of file