W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > January 2019

Re: [dxwg] Data quality model [RDQM] (#58)

From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 21:42:48 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-453868257-1547415767-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@andrea-perego ok I get it. I guess I'm frustrated by the fact that QualifiedAssociation is useful especially for roles of agents (in a typical role or even n-ary relationship pattern) and this is a bit missing here.
The alternative that I saw was that the plan (conformance test) could just as well been attached to the testing activity (i.e. one could have expressed that `a:conformanceTest` guides `a:testingActivity` directly, instead of saying that it guides the agent that did the test). This (and at the same time directly attaching the agent `<http://validator.example.org/>` to `a:testingActivity`) would have spared one level of description.
But well maybe PROV says prov:agent and prov:hadPlan can't be used in such a pattern. And anyway I
 won't question what you have already done elsewhere. It's just that as the complex pattern didn't (and still doesn't) seem needed to me, I wanted to be sure. Not I'll stay silent for a while :-)

Maybe I'll have some comments on 8.2.3 but I won't have time to read it carefully quickly, and anyway I think it's a good contribution to the draft so I'm not going to critique it now.

I am going to try to react to a couple of other issues, but it seems they're discussed in other places. Maybe PR #654 

GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/58#issuecomment-453868257 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 13 January 2019 21:42:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:45:06 UTC