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

Re: quick comment on Note in ProvRDF mapping

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:12:46 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|67eb5b3e3f23c3948c8e519589b5252bo1CACq08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F38E21E.9050206@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
CC: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Tim,

Correction: introduction of section 5.2.4 [1] mentions trust service.

[1] 
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#record-note

Luc

On 02/13/2012 06:02 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> Sorry, I thought you meant motivation in general, as opposed to in the 
> text.
> This can be added if it helps the case.
>
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science
> University of Southampton
> Southampton SO17 1BJ
> United Kingdom
>
> On 13 Feb 2012, at 01:12, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu 
> <mailto:lebot@rpi.edu>> wrote:
>
>> Luc,
>>
>> I can only find Note examples with visual styling ("dotted", "icons", 
>> etc).
>>
>> Is there a "trust" Note example somewhere?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2012, at 5:29 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tim,
>>> Yes we use such notes to also propagate "trust" information
>>>
>>> Professor Luc Moreau
>>> Electronics and Computer Science
>>> University of Southampton
>>> Southampton SO17 1BJ
>>> United Kingdom
>>>
>>> On 12 Feb 2012, at 20:54, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu 
>>> <mailto:lebot@rpi.edu>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there motivation for Notes other than to sneak messages to the 
>>>> visual layer?
>>>>
>>>> note(ann1,[ex:color="blue", ex:screenX=20, ex:screenY=30])
>>>> It seems to me that this is simply data modeling and NOT provenance 
>>>> modeling.
>>>> If it is _only_ data modeling, I think that it should stay out of 
>>>> PROV, which should focus on modeling only provenance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Underneath the surface of Notes is the age old debate 
>>>> of "characterizing attributes" versus "non-characterizing attributes".
>>>>
>>>> -Tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 12, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Of course you can use constructs however you want. I don't think 
>>>>> Note was intended as such so it seems that discussing this usage 
>>>>> would be out of scope.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why confuse potential adopters of the spec?
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 12, 2012, at 21:15, Daniel Garijo 
>>>>> <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es 
>>>>> <mailto:dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> There was some discussion on the prov-o team about this. "Note" 
>>>>>> could be used for describing provenance
>>>>>> statements in an informal way with custom annotations.
>>>>>> Therefore, IMO some people could use it for metadata provenance 
>>>>>> even if that is not the intention on DM.
>>>>>> For example: I could add annotations about all the usages (since 
>>>>>> the note is about a record) stating who is the author
>>>>>> of that assertion.
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Daniel
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2012/2/12 Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl <mailto:p.t.groth@vu.nl>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     I was just having a look through the ProvRDF mappings page:
>>>>>>     http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     In the Note section there is a concern "but NOT for the much
>>>>>>     heavier-duty use that DM offers (meta-provenance)."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     The DM does not use Note for meta provenance so I don't know
>>>>>>     where this is coming from.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     cheers,
>>>>>>     Paul
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>

-- 
Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 10:15:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:56 GMT