W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-prov@w3.org > October 2010

Re: A proposed provenance wg draft charter

From: Deborah McGuinness <dlm@cs.rpi.edu>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 08:34:48 -0400
Message-ID: <4CB84A68.2070102@cs.rpi.edu>
To: Paul Groth <pgroth@gmail.com>
CC: "public-xg-prov@w3.org" <public-xg-prov@w3.org>
Thanks for the work on the draft charter.
I am sending this quickly because i just read the beginning and have a 
significant problem with the slant of the charter with the position of
"The goal of this working group is to refine the Open Provenance Model"
and thought I should air this immediately upon seeing the draft.

I strongly believe that the charter of a working group that would end up 
with a provenance recommendation should start with the contender models 
and take the best aspects from many of them RATHER than starting with 
one model and refining it.  I strongly oppose the position that the 
charter should take any single model and work to refine it.  I would 
propose rather that this group would work like the recent RIF working 
group or others where contender starting points were submitted  or like 
the OWL working group where two contenders emerged - DAML and OIL and 
members from each side worked to create a submission - DAML+OIL that 
truly took elements from both languages and ended up with a joint 
proposal rather than this way that just takes a single model as a 
starting point.

There was some disappointment in the group when we chose to map the 
other contender models to a single model, but most if not all understood 
that decision from the perspective of time.  I can not say though that i 
(or i expect others who were disappointed) could go along with this 
position in a proposed charter.

I am sorry that this comes from someone who did not participate nearly 
as much as I had hoped to.
I had an extremely bad year with my mother's multiple hospitalizations 
and general overwhelming health problems and her subsequent passing.   I 
simply have had no choice but to put everything other than family health 
at a much lower priority.


On 10/15/2010 7:58 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
> Hi All,
> Today on the call we are scheduled to talk about preparations for the 
> final report. Luc and I feel that to write a compelling final report 
> we should be clear about exactly what the report should recommend. 
> There has been some consensus that a working group should be formed 
> around the recommendations extracted from the scenarios ( 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Recommendations_for_scenarios).
> To that end, we have prepared a draft working group charter ( 
> http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/lavm/draft-charter.html ). We note this 
> is only *our own* proposal and we see this as a starting point for 
> discussion within the group.
> We look forward to any comments, questions, thoughts about this 
> proposal. We hope this helps the group to continue to coalesce around 
> a way forward.
> Thanks,
> Paul and Luc
Received on Friday, 15 October 2010 12:35:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:55:59 UTC