- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 09:46:18 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Graham, OK, let's see what you write about alternatives. Luc On 26/08/11 08:08, Graham Klyne wrote: > On 26/08/2011 00:01, Luc Moreau wrote: >> Hi Graham, >> >> On 25/08/11 13:55, Graham Klyne wrote: >>> On 22/08/2011 23:01, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >>>> >>>> PROV-ISSUE-75 (provenance-service-and-provenance-uri): What do we >>>> do when we >>>> get both provenance service and provenance-uri? [Accessing and >>>> Querying >>>> Provenance] >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/75 >>>> >>>> Raised by: Luc Moreau >>>> On product: Accessing and Querying Provenance >>>> >>>> Do we need to specify what a client should do, when it obtains both a >>>> provenance service uri and a provenance-uri? I don't think the >>>> specification >>>> disallows this case. >>>> >>>> It's probably like getting multiple provenance-uris. It's worth >>>> stating it >>>> explicitly. >>> >>> You're right, that case is not disallowed. >>> >>> The client can pick either option, or maybe even try both. It's an >>> application >>> choice. I'd prefer there weren't two options here, but I can't see >>> how to >>> otherwise satisfy the scenario requirements without imposing undue >>> constraints >>> on application design. >>> >> >> To say it's an application choice is a cop out, since the PAQ does >> not offer any >> information to the application to make an intelligent choice. > > I don't think it's a cop out. Application designers know far more > about their particular applications than we can possibly do. > However, I could add a sentence or two suggesting the kinds of > criteria that might come into play (though I don't see it adding much > that an application designer wouldn't know anyway). > >> Isn't there as a minimum, a placeholder for metadata (itself out of >> scope of >> this spec), which gives >> publishers the opportunity to distinguish the two options, which in >> turn helps >> applications >> to make decisions? >> >> >>> In practice, I would expect most discovery services to provide one >>> or the >>> other, not both. >>> >> >> If it's really the case, then why not mandate it? > > Because it's not necessary to make that constraint, and to do so might > well exclude some possibilities that we haven't thought about yet. > > I shall add some text saying a little more about the alternatives, and > the circumstances under which they might be useful. > > #g
Received on Friday, 26 August 2011 08:48:13 UTC