W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > July 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-36: Section 3.2: Accessing the provenance of HTML documents [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

From: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:53:16 +0100
Message-ID: <4E3169CC.5030606@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>

Hi Graham,
This sounds good to me.
Thanks, khalid

On 28/07/2011 13:48, Graham Klyne wrote:
> I've added a note to the text in 
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/provenance-access.html#resource-presented-as-html
>
> [[
> An alternative option would be to use an HTML <meta> element to 
> present provenance links. The <Link> is preferred as it reflects more 
> closely the intended goal, and has been defined with somewhat 
> consistent applicability across HTTP, HTML and potentially RDF data. A 
> specification to use <meta> for this would miss this opportunity to 
> build on the existing specification and registry.
> ]]
>
> #g
> -- 
>
> Khalid Belhajjame wrote:
>> HI Graham,
>>
>> On 24/07/2011 08:14, Graham Klyne wrote:
>>> That you raise this means it clearly needs clarifying in the text.  
>>> In the sense I intended, <meta> could similarly be used _only_ for 
>>> documents presented as HTML.
>>>
>>> I think a new <meta> tag would require more new specification than 
>>> builing on the <link> work.  Technically, I don't think there's much 
>>> to choose, but I feel that hooking into the link type registry will 
>>> seem more clear-cut to potential users, hence have better take-up.  
>>> It's a judgement call.
>>
>> I think I agree with you. Although it is the possibility of using the 
>> <meta> tag, using "link" provides tghe advantage of being somewhat 
>> uniform across different representations, viz. "HTML" and  "HTTP". 
>> Probably we should mention in the text, as you suggested, that 
>> although the <meta> tag could be used, it will require more new 
>> specification compared with the use of <link>.
>>
>> Thanks, khalid
>>
>>>
>>> #g
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>>> PROV-ISSUE-36: Section 3.2: Accessing the provenance of HTML 
>>>> documents [Accessing and Querying Provenance]
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/36
>>>>
>>>> Raised by: Khalid Belhajjame
>>>> On product: Accessing and Querying Provenance
>>>>
>>>> The Powder <link> element is used to specify the provenance of 
>>>> documents presented as HTML. I am wondering why choosing this 
>>>> option instead of simply using the <meta> tag which is supported by 
>>>> plain HTML. Is there any reason behind this choice? Was it simply 
>>>> because there was a desire to be consistent and use POWDER for 
>>>> accessing both HTTP and HTML resources?
>>>> Khalid
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 13:53:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:37 GMT