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

Re: pairs of implementations?

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 10:33:38 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJCyKRrw=JA=_hU9ma8rqSgOu4K49vkkoVvCtJnOHf5ePu9N6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Stephan,

I think option 3 is nice.

Paul


On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote:

>  It looks like we can only have 5 options in the grid question, and each
> question can only have one answer.
>
>  currently the options are
> 1) Consumes
> 2) Produces
> 3) Consumes and Produces
> 4) Does not Support
>
>  I could add another option to this question above, rephrase the options
> from the question above, or add another question for this question.
>
>  Option1:
>
>  Add new option to the list above, "Consumes and Produces Externally
> Generated Provenance".
>
>  Option 2:
>
>  Add "Externally Generated Provenance" after "Consumes" in all options to
> the above question.
>
>  Option 3:
>
>  Create a new question "Known Support for Consumption of Externally
> Generated Provenance by Feature" with options "Known to Support | Not Known
> to Support" for each feature.  This would be another grid question and
> would have just the two options.
>
>  --Stephan
>
>  On Oct 31, 2012, at 6:46 PM, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:
>
> Hi Stephan,
>
>  I wonder if it would be possible to put a check box or something by each
> feature so people can note where a particular feature was known to be used
> by another tool?
>
>  Paul
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote:
>
>>  Checking in to see if the current questionnaire paragraph text
>>
>>  "Has this implementation been used to consume a prov serialization
>> generated by another tool?  If so, please  identify the other tool and
>> describe how it was used."
>>
>>  is good enough for our purposes or if we should perhaps re-word the
>> question or add some additional questions.
>>
>>  --Stephan
>>
>>  On Oct 22, 2012, at 2:41 AM, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>  On Oct 19, 2012, at 12:41 PM, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:
>>
>> Could we ask that as well?
>>
>>
>>   We currently have a paragraph question on provenance exchange.
>>
>>  Question title: Provenance Exchange
>>
>>  Help Text: Has this implementation been used to consume a prov
>> serialization generated by another tool?  If so, please  identify the other
>> tool and describe how it was used.
>>
>>  Perhaps with some tweaking to this question we will have what we need.
>>
>>  As for updating the per-feature support question...
>>
>>  Google Forms is pretty limited and right the question is structured as
>> a Grid where the user can make one and only one selection for each feature
>> (row in grid) from the following options (columns in the grid): Consumes,
>> Produces, Produces and Consumes, Does not Support.
>>
>>  I do not think we can change the question so the user can make multiple
>> selections for any given feature or have any write-in options.  If we add
>> another column that explicitly asks about consumption of
>> externally-produced provenance; the user will be unable to specify any
>> further info such as what external tool produced said feature serialization
>> or in what language (PROV-N, PROV-O, PROV-XML).
>>
>>  Because of the limitations of the Grid question type I think we should
>> use paragraph text questions to elicit feedback on our more complex
>> questions such as proof of language-specific consumption of externally
>> generated provenance features.
>>
>>  --Stephan
>>
>>
>>
>>   Also, I'm wondering for the constraints whether we need to ask on a
>> per constraint basis given that we have this testing procedure approach.
>> Maybe that section can be reduced...
>>
>>  thanks
>> Paul
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> we ask on a per-feature basis if it consumes, but we don't explicitly
>>> say 'from another implementation'.
>>>
>>> --Stephan
>>>
>>> On Oct 19, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Stephan,
>>> >
>>> > I was looking but couldn't seem to find it. Do we ask whether a
>>> particular implementation consumes provenance information from another
>>> implementation on a per feature basis?
>>> >
>>> > cheers
>>> > Paul
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>> --
>> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
>> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
>> Assistant Professor
>> - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group |
>>   Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
>> - The Network Institute
>> VU University Amsterdam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
> --
> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
> Assistant Professor
> - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group |
>   Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
> - The Network Institute
> VU University Amsterdam
>
>
>


-- 
--
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
- Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group |
  Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
- The Network Institute
VU University Amsterdam
Received on Thursday, 1 November 2012 17:34:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 1 November 2012 17:34:08 GMT