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

Re: ACTION-56: ProvRDF mappings ready for review

From: James Cheney <jcheney@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:23:35 +0000
Message-Id: <25E45AAC-1920-4CB6-AD3F-CA8BA5868443@inf.ed.ac.uk>
To: "public-prov-wg@w3.org WG" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
As noted in the teleconference today, issues about the harmonization mapping rules should be raised against product 9:

https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/9

I think a sensible process would be for a raised issue to identify a problem and (ideally) propose a solution consisting of

1. a change to the mapping document that clarifies or improves the harmonization; or
2. a change to Prov-DM that would improve alignment with Prov-O; or
3. a change to Prov-O that would improve alignment with Prov-DM; or
4. complementary changes to both.

If there is agreement that an issue can be resolved by changes to just one of the other documents, it should be reassigned/reraised on the other document.  If an issue simply enunciates a problem without suggesting a way to resolve it via concrete changes to document(s) then the  response to the issue should focus on classifying it first.

I would also be happy to "deal with" issues as they are raised, but if someone else (e.g. Tim) prefers to do this that would also be fine.

Does this sound OK?  Essentially I'm elaborating on my view of the process tentatively agreed at F2F2.

--James

On Feb 16, 2012, at 3:07 PM, James Cheney wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Connected with the revised ontology, the ProvRDF mapping page [1] has been revised and is now ready for comments. 
> 
> It was completed primarily by Tim and other members of the PROV-O team, not me, but I take responsibility for any problems.
> 
> The goal has been to strive for coverage of all stable parts of WD3 (i.e. those not already being changed in WD4), while attempting to sketch what the mapping might look like for unstable parts in order to contribute to the design of PROV-DM WD4 in a way that will hopefully make it easier to re-align PROV-O to match.  Likewise, we hope that as changes are made to PROV-DM its authors will raise issues against the mapping so that we can mirror the changes there and in PROV-O.  This process for synchronizing the two deliverables was discussed and (I think) approved at the F2F2 meeting.
> 
> Please feel free to raise issues against this document; it may (depending on how useful it is) ultimately move into the formal semantics or ontology deliverables.
> 
> --James
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF
> 
> 
> -- 
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
> 
> 
> 


-- 
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2012 17:23:59 GMT

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