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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-490 (prov-constraints-lc-editorial): PROV-CONSTRAINTS pre-Last Call editorial issues [prov-dm-constraints]

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 14:10:39 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPRnXtnSMmOWzsKqHzQdYDGSnXf1QqwhzQSNTSBjFqrcB64rQQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Provenance Working Group Issue
Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
> 3.  Stian's concern about the summary table and figures.
> 3.  Stian's concern about the summary table:
>    >
>    > 2.3 Summary of constraints..
>    >
>    >
>    > This table is utterly confusing to me as it is not a summary, it does
>    > not tell me anything, and I don't understand the columns. (Not helped
>    > by the lack of colours and borders on a print out!)

This has not yet been addressed. If I use Chrome, and I print to PDF,
then I get a very confusing table without any borders:


This can be partially worked around with by adding borders in the
print style sheet.

>    > I can see it is useful to have a kind of index of all the constraints,
>    > but the table needs some work to be understandable. In the web version
>    > it is kind-of OK, since the constraints have human readable names -
>    > but is there a reason to keep the third column rather than simple
>    > horisontal headers? Perhaps even the Type/Relation column could be
>    > done as headers?

So my suggestion is to make Table 2 like this:

  <tr><th colspan="2"><h3>Component 1: Bits and bops</h3></th><tr>
  <tr><td rowspan="3">Entity</td>   <td>wasGeneratedBy-is-important</td> </tr>
<td>used-is-important</td> </tr>
<td>everything-is-important</td> </tr>
  <tr><td rowspan="3">Activity</td>   <td>wasStartedBy-is-important</td> </tr>
<!-- ... -->
  <tr><th colspan="2"><h3>Component 2: Lots of stuff</h3></th><tr>
<!-- ... -->

By removing the third column and making the components appear as
inline headers, the table should become much more manageable,
specially as it fills across multiple screens/pages.

Component 4 (Bundles) and 6 (Collections) don't have anything listed.
Constraint 58 (membership-empty-collection) should be under 6.

Component 4 could have something like "No specific constraints; see
section 6.2 Bundles and Documents"

Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
Received on Monday, 3 September 2012 13:11:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:18 UTC