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

Re: Proposal on PROV-DM reorganization

From: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 06:09:21 -0700
Message-ID: <4FBB9001.80304@ncl.ac.uk>
To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Graham

see below

On 5/21/12 11:34 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
> On 21/05/2012 14:29, Paolo Missier wrote:
>> - importantly what are these /patterns/?? these have always been constructs,
>> relations, etc. Patterns to me are particular compositions of these that are
>> designed to achieve a particular effect. I think these are not patterns.
> Paolo,
>
> To my mind, that they are more than just constructs, relations, etc. is a key to
> understanding how provenance may be approached.  Maybe you don't like the term
> "patterns" because it has other software engineering usage?
I explained above my understanding of the term pattern. I also invoking a OD definition is of limited value, as it does not carry 
with it our specific context. If you use UML, then I believe you are inevitably using the term "pattern" in /that/ context.  (as I 
am sure you know the key reference to SE patterns in fact comes from architecture:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Pattern_Language)
I have no desire or time to start another exchange of opinions on a loosely defined term, but for all it's worth:

We never until now felt the need to introduce the term "pattern" and this has never been discussed. I don't see how it can just be 
added now, and why  Also, we have decided to use UML as minimal grounding of our concepts, at least for illustrative purposes. The 
term "pattern" inevitably takes on the definition that comes with this particular context. The UML diagrams in the document are not 
patterns. They define a data model, which consists of classes and associations. These are all primitives, including the extensions. 
/To my mind/ :-), patterns belong in a "provenance cookbook" and describe appropriate combinations of classes and associations as I 
tried to express earlier (above).

I don't think this is worth discussing further but I am really not comfortable with introducing this term out of the blue at this 
stage of the editing process.  I hope you don't feel too strongly about it.

-Paolo

>
> To my mind, there *are* key patterns/structures that underpin use of most of the
> provenance constructs and relations, etc.  Having these structures clearly
> presented provides a developer with a mental framework which they can use to
> organize the more detailed and specialized constructs as and when they are
> required, and also helps them to understand how new specializations can be
> introduced for the needs of particular applications.
>
> Thus, I think the core elements do form a pattern in exactly a leading sense
> defined by the Oxford dictionary:
> "an arrangement or design regularly found in comparable objects: the house had
> been built on the usual pattern" -- http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/pattern
>
> So I've taken to using the phrase "core patterns" for these because I find it
> usefully evocative.  But "core structures" could also work for me.  Maybe
> there's some other term that works as well?
>
> #g
> --
>
>
>>> On May 20, 2012, at 6:01 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> During last week's telcon [1] the chairs were tasked to come-up with a
>>>> proposal that tried to reflect consensus on reorganization of the data
>>>> model. This would take into account both Graham's proposal [2] as well
>>>> as the WG discusion and prior agreements.
>>>>
>>>> We've come up with with the following proposal:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvDM_ConsensusProposal
>>>>
>>>> We hope this reflects a consensus with the working group and something
>>>> we could proceed on. Is this a good foundation to proceed?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-05-17
>>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvDM_Proposal_for_restructuring
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>


-- 
-----------  ~oo~  --------------
Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University,  UK
http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 13:10:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 13:10:22 GMT