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

Re: ProvRDF <-> PROV-O coverage

From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 08:27:02 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|dc590e197d76fbdd95883c772cb3fa8bo248R708L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F5478D6.9080002@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Tim

I suppose you mean the notation wasGeneratedBy([id],e,[a],[t],[attrs])
instead of wasGeneratedBy(id,e,a,t,attrs).

We discussed this with Paolo and we don't feel it's suitable since whenever
we write wasGeneratedBy(id,e,a,t,attrs), we mean an instance of the data 
model.

If we want to identify the optional nature of an attribute, we need to 
look at the
grammar, not at an instance.

Luc

PS. The square brackets around attributes do not mark they are optional, 
they are
part of the syntax.

On 03/02/2012 01:56 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote:
> I would like to propose that the DM editors consider adopting the notation used in ProvRDF, since the PROV-O team found it easier to work with and we believe that others will find it easier as well.
>
>    

-- 
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, 5 March 2012 08:27:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:58 GMT