- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 22:59:23 +0000
- To: "Ceolin, D." <d.ceolin@vu.nl>, W3C CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
Hi Davide, I’d suggest that the provenance of a particular table/row/column/field is just one of the many kinds of annotations that you could have. If you did have a provenance annotation then it should use PROV [1]. I can’t think of anything that marks provenance as different from any other type of annotation (or in need of special handling), but perhaps you have something in mind? Jeni [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-primer/ ------------------------------------------------------ From: Ceolin, D. d.ceolin@vu.nl Reply: Ceolin, D. d.ceolin@vu.nl Date: 27 February 2014 at 09:06:58 To: W3C CSV on the Web Working Group public-csv-wg@w3.org Subject: CSVs and provenance > > Hi all, > > I've seen some hints of provenance around, but I'd like to tackle > the problem a little bit deeper. > I believe that there are at least two provenance issues, that > are related each other and that probably need a standardized > handling: > - if a CSV file is obtained from a spreadsheet, it's likely that > one or more 'cells' result from formulas applied to other cells > in the same CSV. Probably (a simplified version of) PROV is a good > candidate to represent such relations? If I'm not wrong, there > was some related discussion floating around in the chat two telcos > ago (about "sum" cells?). > - also, the whole CSV file may be the result of a specific process, > especially if it represents a DB dump and/or the result of a computation. > It would be useful to be able to annotate these files with their > provenance. > > I'm not sure if this is in the scope of the working group, but I believe > that at least part of it is. > Cheers, > > Davide > > > > -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com/
Received on Saturday, 1 March 2014 22:59:49 UTC