W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re: PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:54:16 -0400
Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1423B288-5822-4184-8B01-BFE9F7A831CF@rpi.edu>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Luc,


On Apr 11, 2012, at 5:56 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:

> Hi Tim,
> 
> My understanding of the location attribute is restrictive. 
> This is how I also specified the current XML schema.

Okay.

> 
> I also think it's inline with our way of handling time. E.g. We said we didn't want prov:time on entity.
> 
> Thoughts?

So does restating "The attribute prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity" to 
"The attribute prov:location is an optional attribute of entity, activity, usage, and generation."

sound reasonable? If so, I think it would address this issue and we can close it.

Regards,
Tim



> 
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science
> University of Southampton 
> Southampton SO17 1BJ
> United Kingdom
> 
> On 11 Apr 2012, at 20:47, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Luc,
>> 
>> 
>> On Apr 11, 2012, at 12:30 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Tim,
>>> 
>>> I don't think there has been suggestion that the location attribute applies to other classes. You are making a good case for usage and generation.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>>> 
>>> What else?
>> 
>> I would be happy with just adding Usage and Generation. It covers the cases that I can think of.
>> 
>>> Everything? Note sure this works for Quotation, OriginalSource, Attribution, Association, Responsibility .
>> 
>> None of these make sense upon a cursory consideration.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> However, part of my question was:
>> 
>>>> Is it acceptable to view the DM's current statement as non-restrictive?
>> 
>> So, even if you do add Usage and Generation to the list with Entitiy and Activity, can someone conformant-ly put a location on something else?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Professor Luc Moreau
>>> Electronics and Computer Science
>>> University of Southampton 
>>> Southampton SO17 1BJ
>>> United Kingdom
>>> 
>>> On 10 Apr 2012, at 22:58, "Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm]
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/342
>>>> 
>>>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>>>> On product: prov-dm
>>>> 
>>>> 4.7.4.2 prov:location
>>>> 
>>>> states:
>>>> 
>>>> "The attribute prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity. "
>>>> 
>>>> does this imply that it is NOT an attribute of any other class?
>>>> 
>>>> I imagine that it might be useful to specify the location of a usage, which would be more specific than the location of the using activity. e.g., "The party happened at Sarah's. The cake was cut with a knife in the kitchen." To mention "kitchen" for the usage, prov:location seems natural.
>>>> 
>>>> Is it acceptable to view the DM's current statement as non-restrictive?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tim
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 22:54:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:07:03 GMT