--- a/model/comments/issue-331-Khalid.txt	Thu Apr 12 11:56:23 2012 +0100
+++ b/model/comments/issue-331-Khalid.txt	Thu Apr 12 12:19:12 2012 +0100
@@ -6,7 +6,8 @@
   >   that is encoded using provo. I would add PROVO as well to that
   >   sentence.
 
-OK
+Do we use sparql to *retrieve* provenance? To query it, yes. 
+
   > 
   > - Fourth public working draft -> Fifth working draft
   > 
@@ -16,7 +17,7 @@
 
   > - 1.1 Structure of the document. "... which are allows users" -> "which allow users"
 
-yes.
+Done.
 
   > 
   > - 2.2 Generation, Usage, Derivation In the definition of Usage it is
@@ -65,6 +66,7 @@
   > provenance from the process point of view.
   > 
 
+TODO:
 We could start with the author view.
 
 
@@ -78,7 +80,8 @@
   > relation in another component. I note also that the term component is
   > used in the text to refers to the definition elements in PROV-N. I
 
-I don't think so, we use the term constituent.
+Removed a confusing occurrence of component, and also constituent.
+
 
   > would therefore suggest not ti use the notion of component, and rather
   > use directly heading such as "Entity, Activity and their Relations",
@@ -87,6 +90,8 @@
 It's useful to have groupings of concepts, to give some structure to the dm.
 The term component is reasonable for this.
 
+TODO: consider changing headings of components.
+
   > 
   > - One of the consequence of trying to structure the model into
   >   component, is the fact that the reader will have to read the details
@@ -109,12 +114,14 @@
   > understand that a sub-workflow will be started by the parent
   > workflow. I think this should explicitly stated.
 
-OK to add.
+Added: "It is assumed that the activities <span class="name">a1</span> and <span class="name">a2</span> are of type "workflow" and "subworkflow", respectively; the latter was started by the former."
+
   > 
   > - 4.4.1 Specialization In the first paragraph: "common entity" ->
   > "common thing"
 
-I don't see this. Where is it?
+I don't see this. 
+
   > 
   > -4.5 Component 5: Collections I think that there is a need for
   > defining collection here.  Although it is stated that a collection is
@@ -136,9 +143,8 @@
 attributes.
 
 
-This is expressed with 
+What you suggest can be expressed with 
 derivedByInsertionFrom(c1, c0, {("k1", e1), ("k2", e2), ...})       
-
 where c0 is an empty collection.
 
 Do we need another relation for this?

--- a/model/glossary.html	Thu Apr 12 11:56:23 2012 +0100
+++ b/model/glossary.html	Thu Apr 12 12:19:12 2012 +0100
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@
 
 <span class="glossary" id="glossary-specialization">  
 An entity is a <dfn id="concept-specialization">specialization</dfn> of another if they refer to some common thing
-but the former is a more constrained entity than the latter. The common thing do not need to be identified.
+but the former is a more constrained entity than the latter. The common thing does not need to be identified.
 </span> 
 
 <span class="glossary" id="glossary-qualifiedName">  

--- a/model/glossary.js	Thu Apr 12 11:56:23 2012 +0100
+++ b/model/glossary.js	Thu Apr 12 12:19:12 2012 +0100
@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@
 ' ' + 
 '<span class="glossary" id="glossary-specialization">   ' + 
 'An entity is a <dfn id="concept-specialization">specialization</dfn> of another if they refer to some common thing ' + 
-'but the former is a more constrained entity than the latter. The common thing do not need to be identified. ' + 
+'but the former is a more constrained entity than the latter. The common thing does not need to be identified. ' + 
 '</span>  ' + 
 ' ' + 
 '<span class="glossary" id="glossary-qualifiedName">   ' + 

--- a/model/prov-dm.html	Thu Apr 12 11:56:23 2012 +0100
+++ b/model/prov-dm.html	Thu Apr 12 12:19:12 2012 +0100
@@ -1359,6 +1359,7 @@
 activity(a2,t3,t4,[ex:host="server2.example.org",prov:type="subworkflow"])
 wasStartedByActivity(a2,a1)
 </pre>
+It is assumed that the activities <span class="name">a1</span> and <span class="name">a2</span> are of type "workflow" and "subworkflow", respectively; the latter was started by the former.
 </div>
 
 </section>