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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-250 (TLebo): respond to Eric's comments [Ontology]

From: Eric <ericphb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:32:45 -0700
Message-ID: <dgbctoji98vb0xsop0klr7x0.1334766765978@email.android.com>
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>, Eric G Stephan <Eric.Stephan@pnnl.gov>
Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Yes please do so and thank you.w

Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:

>Eric,
>
>Thanks for your review of the PROV-O HTML.
>
>All of your comments have either been handled, overcome by events, or overlap with other existing issues which we are working to address.
>
>May we close this issue?
>
>Responses within.
>
>Regards,
>Tim
>
>
>
>“PROV Ontology” and “PROV ontology” are used interchangeably
>throughout the document.  Since “PROV Ontology” is the formal name  we
>should be consistent.
>
>>>>> TL: Thanks. I made this uniform.
>
>
>Section 2.1:
>
>“As a reader I thought it would be helpful to have a link on the
>“Abstract Syntax Notation (ASN) to take me directly to
>http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111018/#prov-asn--the-provenance-abstract-syntax-notation
>explaining the motivation behind using ASN.  The  above referenced
>section in PROV-DM does a great job of briefly providing the
>rationale.
>
>
>>>>> TL: Thanks for pointing this out, it highlighted a few hiccups in the current draft.
>>>> I've noted this at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-o_draft_review_2_April_2012#Eric  and will manage it from there.
>
>
>
>Section 3.1
>
>Direct links corresponding from PROV-O class to PROV-DM model element
>would make references between the two documents more intuitive.
>
>E.g.
>
>Class Description
>Entity is defined to be "An Entity represents an identifiable
>characterized thing."
>[http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111018/#expression-Entity]
>
>
>>>>> TL: Thanks for the suggestion. It is noted at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-o_draft_review_2_April_2012 and will be handled soon. The links are in the ontology, we just need to expose them into the HTML via the cross reference script.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  3.1.6
>
>I was confused between the Class definition of location (geographic
>location) and the example which was a directory path.     If we are
>going to include directory paths then the definition of location needs
>to be more general.
>
>Comment on concern about “geospatial”:  Geospatial tends to be used to
>refer to geographic data that is most likely used for processing or
>analysis as opposed to something that is displayed on a map.
>Recommend defer to the existing ISO standard definition.
>
>
>>>>> TL: This is  http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/128 ISSUE-128 and we'll be handling it there soon.
>
>
>
>
>
>On Feb 10, 2012, at 8:18 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>
>> PROV-ISSUE-250 (TLebo): respond to Eric's comments [Ontology]
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/250
>> 
>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>> On product: Ontology
>> 
>> Eric has provided some comments on the PROVO HTML document.
>> 
>> We need to respond to his comments.
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/mid/CAMFz4jjE=hz-Pn4uqMN2xf5iCL6kqsW0qBUE2ehoZAF_n5=kEA@mail.gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2012 16:33:27 GMT

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