- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 19:14:27 +0200
- To: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
James, I have not yet gone through the full document (and it is a heavy read for a newcomer:-). I have one notational question/issue on the notation. That is: what does '[]' means in the definitions/constraints? Does it mean 'a set of attributes whose content we do not know and care' or 'an empty set of attributes'. I have the impression that all the rules rely on the former case, essentially saying that we do not necessarily know about the attributes. Eg, in Inference 15 we infer a wasGeneratedBy and a wasAssociatedWith and, I presume, what we say there is that there might be attributes on those but we do not care (after all, attributes may be application dependent). However, as a programmer, '[]' definitely associates with an empty list/array. I may be wrong in my understanding. In any case, it may deserve explicit definition (which I did not find…) More comments may come, but not today... Ivan Two mini buglets: - Remark after the definition of optional placeholders: "wasAssociatedWith(id;a, ag,-,attr)" -> " wasAssociatedWith(id;a,ag,-,attr) - Right before inference 8: "statemen,t" -> "statement," ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 17:14:51 UTC