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

Re: hasProvenance property name [MAYBE URGENT]

From: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:12:07 +0000
Message-ID: <512DF817.4050108@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
CC: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
OK, has_provenance it is.  I'll make the changes now.

#g
--

On 27/02/2013 10:26, Paul Groth wrote:
> ok will do.
>
> @Graham will you update the paq?
>
> Thanks
> Paul
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>wrote:
>
>>   yes Paul, no problem, I wouldn't wait till the call, I would tell all
>> editors now.
>>
>> Luc
>>
>>
>> On 02/27/2013 10:16 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>
>> I have this as part of the agenda item on the call tomorrow.
>>
>>   I'd like to decide by then.
>>
>>   @Luc are you ok with the underscore solution?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Very honestly: I do not have strong opinion here, I can go either way.
>>> But yes, we should decide soon.
>>>
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>> On Feb 27, 2013, at 11:02 , Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Have we come to a conclusion on this?
>>>>
>>>> We need to decide to let people go through the staging process.
>>>>
>>>> I'm in favor of prov:has_provenance . As this is a purely syntactic
>>> change from what we already had.
>>>>
>>>> cheers
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I would favour prov:has_provenance over prov:hasprovenance or
>>> prov:provenance.
>>>>
>>>> I have a concern that prov:provenance reads more like a class name than
>>> a
>>>> property/relation.  Also, can we be sure that, in future, someone won't
>>> want to
>>>> define prov:Provenance as a class of some kind?  (Because of the case
>>>> insensitive matching defined by RFC5988, and arguably good practice
>>> generally,
>>>> the capitalized form should be off-limits for future use if
>>> prov:provenance is
>>>> selected.
>>>>
>>>> #g
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 26/02/2013 10:51, Paul Groth wrote:
>>>>> That seems to be the best way then.
>>>>>
>>>>> so prov:hasprovenance or prov:has_provenance
>>>>>
>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean the element that is generated into the header of the
>>> HTML? If
>>>>>> that is the only place it appears, I think we can change that for the
>>>>>> published PR document before handing it over to the webmaster.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:42 , Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> ----
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>   --
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 Wednesday, 27 February 2013 12:13:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 February 2013 12:13:17 GMT