- From: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:08:45 -0700
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
hi Stain, I have updated the bundle text based on your feedback. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/23df88c5f810 Thanks, --Stephan On Feb 14, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote: > Thanks Stian. > > Good suggestions on the text edits. I will make the updates today. > > --Stephan > > On Feb 14, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: > >> It looks good! >> >> I've updated and tested the examples at >> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/59d3339f4090/xml/examples which all >> validate. >> >> <foaf:name> now works great - a downside is that any unknown elements >> in a schemaed non-prov namespace is allowed as well, like: >> <dcterms:madeup>Oh oh</dcterms:madeup> >> >> (I thought this was not allowed in 'lax' when the schema for a >> namespace was known, but perhaps Eclipse is being silly.) Anyway I >> think it's a compromise that is worthwhile. It still fails if I go >> against a custom type - like on line 31 in: >> >> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/59d3339f4090/xml/examples/custom-example.xml#l31 >> >> >> I would change the intro slightly: >> >>> A prov:Bundle is an extension of prov:Entity that can be associated with a set of nested provenance statements, which is represented by the prov:BundleConstructor complexType and referenced with the prov:bundleContent element. Provenance statements may be made about the set by referencing the associated entity. >> >> to >> >> "A prov:Bundle identifies a set of provenance descriptions, and is an >> extension of prov:Entity, so allowing provenance of provenance to be >> expressed by referencing the associated entity. The content of a >> bundle, ie. its provenance records, can be represented by the >> prov:BundleConstructor complexType and can be specified with the >> prov:bundleContent element, its prov:id corresponds to the bundle >> entity." >> >> >> (What I want to imply is that you can use either <prov:bundle> or >> <prov:bundleContent> or, ideally, both. ) >> >> >> >> Later: >> >>> The element prov:bundleContent is used to reference a set of nested provenance statements from within a prov:Document. >> >> >> Then we should probably add something like: >> >> "Although bundle content can only be represented at <prov:document> >> level, the corresponding bundle entities may be specified at any >> <prov:bundle> nesting level, if at all." >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 6:12 AM, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote: >>> Yes. >>> >>> --Stephan >>> >>> On Feb 13, 2013, at 11:02 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Stephan. Is the document ready or review? >>>> >>>> Professor Luc Moreau >>>> Electronics and Computer Science >>>> University of Southampton >>>> Southampton SO17 1BJ >>>> United Kingdom >>>> >>>> On 14 Feb 2013, at 00:21, "Stephan Zednik" <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Luc, >>>>> >>>>> Because time is running down on getting the PROV-XML Note ready for the next release I went ahead and updated the editors draft with the discussed changes. >>>>> >>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/xml/prov-xml.html >>>>> >>>>> I have added sections to the design patterns section concerning the schema modularity and the conventions on type information. >>>>> >>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/xml/prov-xml.html#schema-modularization >>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/xml/prov-xml.html#type-conventions >>>>> >>>>> I have also update the Bundles section with the design that Stian and I have most recently been discussing and which I think will be satisfactory to you. I did rename the element to bundleContent as Stian suggested because it reads much better than bundleConstructor. >>>>> >>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/xml/prov-xml.html#component4 >>>>> >>>>> Please let me know if you would like me to change anything. I tried to make the text in the bundle section clear but it's wording may not align with your interpretation. >>>>> >>>>> I have also made several other update to the document including updating the SOTD section, please refer to the Change Log section at the bottom for a summary of changes. >>>>> >>>>> --Stephan >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 13, 2013, at 9:43 AM, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> How about the following changes? More discussion of the bundleConstructor referencing element name below. >>>>>> >>>>>> <xs:complexType name="Bundle"> >>>>>> <xs:complexContent> >>>>>> <xs:extension base="prov:Entity"> >>>>>> </xs:extension> >>>>>> </xs:complexContent> >>>>>> </xs:complexType> >>>>>> >>>>>> <xs:complexType name="BundleConstructor"> >>>>>> <xs:sequence maxOccurs="unbounded"> >>>>>> <xs:group ref="prov:documentElements"/> >>>>>> <xs:any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>>>>> </xs:sequence> >>>>>> <xs:attribute ref="prov:id"/> >>>>>> </xs:complexType> >>>>>> >>>>>> <xs:element name="document" type="prov:Document" /> >>>>>> <xs:complexType name="Document"> >>>>>> <xs:sequence maxOccurs="unbounded"> >>>>>> <xs:group ref="prov:documentElements" minOccurs="0"/> >>>>>> <xs:element name="bundleConstructor" type="prov:BundleConstructor" minOccurs="0"/> >>>>>> <xs:any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" /> >>>>>> </xs:sequence> >>>>>> </xs:complexType> >>>>>> >>>>>> The group prov:documentElements does not contain a reference to prov:BundleConstructor. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 13, 2013, at 2:50 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: >>>>>>>> In section 5.4.2, >>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-prov-dm-20121211/#term-bundle-entity, you will >>>>>>>> see the sentence: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A bundle description is of the form entity(id, [ prov:type='prov:Bundle', >>>>>>>> attr1=val1, ...] ) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I therefore think it would be very confusing to use the term >>>>>>>> bundleDescriptions to refer to the constructor of section 5.4.1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Agreed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A bundle constructor ◊ allows the content and the name of a bundle to be specified >>>>>>> >>>>>>> what about <bundleContent> then? I think that should make distinction >>>>>>> with <bundle> obvious, more so than the 'constructor' which you would >>>>>>> have to read PROV-DM with a lens to understand. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thus in a way everything in PROV-XML is a description, <bundle> is a >>>>>>> bundle description, and <bundleContent> describes the content of the >>>>>>> bundle (ie. further PROV statements). >>>>>> >>>>>> With the modeling suggestion above I use prov:bundleConstructor, but like Stian I am not a big fan of how it reads in XML. >>>>>> >>>>>> I like the following (in order of preference): >>>>>> >>>>>> bundleContent >>>>>> bundleRecords >>>>>> bundleStatements >>>>>> >>>>>> --Stephan >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team >>>>>>> School of Computer Science >>>>>>> The University of Manchester >> >> >> >> -- >> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team >> School of Computer Science >> The University of Manchester >> >> > >
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2013 19:11:18 UTC