--- a/model/ProvenanceModel.html	Thu Oct 06 22:52:10 2011 +0100
+++ b/model/ProvenanceModel.html	Thu Oct 06 23:21:01 2011 +0100
@@ -274,6 +274,14 @@
 <p>In our conceptualization of the world, instantaneous events, or <dfn id="concept-event">events</dfn> for short, happen in the world, which mark changes in the world, in its activities, and in its things.  This specification assumes that a partial order exists between events. How practically such order is realized is beyond the scope of this specification. Possible implementations of that ordering include a single global notion of time and Lamport's style clocks.</p>
 
 <p> In this specification, the qualifier 'identifiable' is implicit whenever a reference is made to an activity or characterized thing.</p>
+
+
+<div class='note'>
+Now that "entity expression" is used to refer to the 
+language construct, the term "entity" can unambiguously refer to the thing 
+described by that construct; i.e. the characterized thing. 
+This is raised in the following <a href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Sep/0315.html">email</a>.</div>
+
     </section> 
 
     <section> 
@@ -791,7 +799,7 @@
 <li> MAY contain a <a href="#expression-RecipeLink">recipe link</a> <span class="name">rl</span>, which consists of a domain specific description of the activity;</li>
 <li> MAY contain a start time <span class="name">st</span>;</li>
 <li> MAY contain an end time <span class="name">et</span>;</li>
-<li> contains a set of attribute-value pairs <span class="name">[ attr1=val1, ...]</span>, representing other attributes of this activity that hold for its all duration.</li>
+<li> contains a set of attribute-value pairs <span class="name">[ attr1=val1, ...]</span>, representing other attributes of this activity that hold for its whole duration.</li>
 </ul>
 
 

--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/model/satya-comments-issue-101.txt	Thu Oct 06 23:21:01 2011 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+  > 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?
+
+Same answer as before.
+
+  > 
+  > 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.
+
+This should not be seen as attribute, since this is an instantaneous status.
+It does not characterize the PE for its 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.
+
+This is a concept from philosophy, W. E. Johnson, Logic: Part III (1924)
+
+Do we want to cite this book?  There are lots of other things we could
+also cite!
+
+  > 
+  > [1]BFO: www.ifomis.org/bfo/1.1
+  > [2]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Aug/0038.html
+  >