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

Re: Complexity/simplicty redux

From: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 11:39:49 +0100
Message-ID: <4FA8F7F5.1030603@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
CC: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On 06/05/2012 12:01, Paul Groth wrote:
> Graham,
>
> Don't we do something simliar with starting points in both prov-o and
> prov-dm? I don't really see how what we have is more complicated. We
> have what is considered a base and then we build off that. The group
> had concerns about calling some things "core" and "not core". That's
> why we use starting points.

"Starting points" doesn't do it for me, because it still implies a requirement 
to use all the other complex stuff.  I don't understand the concern about "core" 
vs "non-core" since (to my mind) there *is* a clear distinction between some 
core structural elements and non-structural ("epistemic"?) elements.

To date, my review effort has focused on the DM, since that *should* be a 
natural goto point for someone seeking to get a grasp of the actual technical 
details, but to my mind it does not succeed in that.  On the basis of a brief 
scan, I think the primer and ontology documents do much better.

> It would really be good to get specific suggestions from you. What
> should be cut? What should be changed? I have made specific
> suggestions for increasing simplicity for example by making
> collections a separate document.

I'm working on some suggestions that I'll try to articulate in a separate email.

#g
--
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 11:59:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 May 2012 11:59:26 GMT