Re: [bug] Provenance

Thanks Yves. I haven't re ran the output in a while and Pablo was updating
the provenance input files over Christmas so that the input files were more
in line with LQI . I will have to correct a few things in the parser for
provenance which I will try to get around to this week. I should have
updated the output sooner though. Thanks for the help.

Thanks,
Leroy


On 9 January 2013 12:59, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote:

> Hi Leroy, all,
>
> We've finally decided to implement Provenance.
> And when running the test suite we've found quite a few issues with both
> the input and output files.
>
> They are listed here:
>
> https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/commit/af878d03ca7b4f4fd0d62094801f2bb13d1f60d8
>
> https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/commit/f8442cf8dbd5c8be7ec0e0e67e5f073783d350c0
>
> Most files were incorrect.
>
> Some of the problems were just related to output conventions, for example:
> Spaces vs tabs to separate the fields; fields ordered by name then by index
> instead of by index then by name; index on provenanceRecordsRef; etc. I
> went by what was decided in the LQI output since it makes sense to have all
> standoff output following the same conventions.
>
> But other things were a bit stranger: provenanceRecordsRefPointer="#pr1"
> instead of provenanceRecordsRefPointer="@xml:id"; many invalid XMLs (extra
> closing tags); output data completely different from the input data, etc.
> We should have caught those issues long ago. Didn't anyone implemented
> Provenance yet?
>
> Anyway, hopefully several of you can double-check my corrections and make
> sure we have proper input/output now.
>
> Thanks,
> -yves
>
>
>
>
>