W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > February 2013

Re: hasProvenance property name [MAYBE URGENT]

From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 09:42:24 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|a345c7473ed2407dac63758a1235fcccp1P9gQ08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|512C8380.4000601@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
It's in the <link> element we added last week.

On 26/02/2013 09:40, Ivan Herman wrote:
> Graham,
>
> I am not sure I understand something.
>
> I have looked at the prov-o document, and that document does not mention the prov:hasProvenance term. Ie, where does this term appear in any of the four Rec-track documents? More importantly, does it appear, if it does, in a normative section?
>
> Ivan
>
>
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:30 , Graham Klyne<GK@ninebynine.org>  wrote:
>
>    
>> Hi,
>>
>> [I'm keeping this off-list for now, because if Ivan says there's nothing we can do at this juncture, I see little point in opening the issue for wider discussion.  I am cc'ing www-archive so there's a record of our discussion.]
>>
>> This is a bit embarrassing, given an email I wrote just a couple of days ago.
>>
>> I'm working through comments on PROV-AQ, and Stian has raised the following:
>>
>> [[
>> 32) According to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988#section-4.2
>>
>> When extension relation types are compared, they MUST be compared as
>>    strings (after converting to URIs if serialised in a different
>>    format, such as a Curie [W3C.CR-curie-20090116]) in a case-
>>    insensitive fashion, character-by-character.  Because of this, all-
>>    lowercase URIs SHOULD be used for extension relations.
>>
>> Should we not have relation URIs that are all lowercase to avoid problems?  ie.
>>
>> Link:<http://acme.example.org/provenance/super-widget>;
>>            rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#hasprovenance"
>> ]]
>>
>> I had completely missed this in RFC5988, and had forgotten about Stian's comment when I replied a couple of days ago.
>>
>> If we hadn't just been through the incorporation of provenance links into the published documents, I'd suggest changing "hasProvenance" to "has_provenance" to avoid the problems noted.
>>
>> So, what now?  I see a few options:
>>
>> (a) keep the same name, and simply note that, when used as a link relation, prov:hasProvenance is compared case-insensitively.
>> (b) if it's not too late, change the property name
>> (c) define a second property that is all lowercase, and declared equivalent to the first.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, the main consequence of going with option (a) is that we MUST NOT in future define a different property/relation prov:hasprovenance, as under some circumstances covered by RFC5988, this would be indistinguishable from prov:hasProvenance.
>>
>> Given where we now are, my inclination would be to stay with things as they are, but add a note reserving the all lower-case versions of prov:hasProvenance, etc., from future use because of the case insensitivity comparison requirement.
>>
>> #g
>> --
>>      
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
>
>
>
>
>    

-- 
Professor Luc Moreau
Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 09:42:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 February 2013 09:42:56 GMT