public-prov-wg@w3.org from August 2011 by subject

[PAQ] editorial issues

[PAQ] rel="me"

[paq] using anchor or different links

[Spam:***** SpamScore] Re: formal semantics strawman

call for new question ideas for the 2nd implementation stakeholder questionnaire

CIDOC-CRM Ontology

closing issues for the Model Document

Connection Task Force Conference Call

cross-referencing constraints in conceptual model and formal model

Dates for second F2F

defining shortcuts and extensions

Discussion focus for the next two weeks

formal semantics strawman

Guidelines for the Connection Task Force Report

ISSUE-83: Express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology

Meeting minutes 2011-08-04

Minutes from July 28, 2011 Telecon

Minutes of Aug. 11 2011 Telecon

name of standards - responses

naming the standard

PAQ closing issues

PAQ document update, target renamed as context

PAQ: further revision of simple HTTP interface for discovery (ISSUE 53)

PAQ: revised section on querying

playing with pil ontology

Possible regrets (was: Telecon Agenda Aug 18, 2011)

Prov WG Telecon Agenda 04 August 2011

PROV-ISSUE-26 (uses and generates questions): How can one figure out the provenance of a given entity?

PROV-ISSUE-32: Bob definition [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-33: Section 3.1 and Section 3.2: example of IVPof [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-35: Section 4: How one would know that two BOBs are characterizations of the same entity? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-39 (generation-identifiable-activity): Generation should be defined as an identifable activity [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-40 (recommended-roles): Roles should not be SHOULD and not MUST [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-41 (distinct-roles): Distinct roles should be SHOULD and not MUST [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-43 (derivation-time): Deriviation should have associated time [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-44 (shortcuts): Introduce widely used provenance concepts as shortcuts in the model [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-45: isDerivedFrom and IVPof are transitive. [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-46 (where-is-D-in-provenance): Where do I find document D in provenance [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-48 (Provenance Concept: Revision): Revision should be a class and not a property [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-51 (asserter-def): Asserter needs to be defined with respect to a provenance container/account [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-53 (sparql-query-is-overkill): can't we have a lighter method to retrieve provenance-uri, given a document uri? [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-55 (are-provenance-uris-needed): Are provenance URIs really needed [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-56 (derivation-definition-does-not-imply-transitivity): Derivation as defined is not transitive [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-57 (comment-on-ivp-of): comment on ivp of

PROV-ISSUE-58 (time-iso8601): is reference to iso8601 appropriate? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-59 (generation-definition): on generation [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-60: comments on bob [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-61 (is-revision-necessary): is revision necessary? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-62 (about-prov-language): about provenance language [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-64 (definition-use): definition of use [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-65 (domain-specific-info): How is domain specific data combined with the generic model [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-66 (is-execution-a-bob): Why is process execution not defined as a characterised entity? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-67 (single-execution): What is a PE? (was) Why is there a difference in what is represented by one vs multiple executions? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-67 (single-execution): Why is there a difference in what is represented by one vs multiple executions? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-68 (http-link-domain): Domain of HTTP links with rel=provenance [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-69 (Process Execution): Process execution occurs over a "continuous time interval"? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-70 (provenance-term): PAQ document uses inconsistent terminology for "provenance"

PROV-ISSUE-71 (Conceptual Model draft): Section 3.2 of Conceptual Model draft (Content and Editing) [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-72 (DGarijo): Uses should be renamed as used [Formal Model]

PROV-ISSUE-73: Use "anchor" context URI instead of introducing a "target" relationship in HTTP [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-74: Consider renaming target-uri as context-uri to be consistent with RFC 5988 [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

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]

PROV-ISSUE-76 (xml-examples): Shouldn't we have proper examples in XML and not RDF/XML [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-77 (paq-terminology): terminology issues [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-78 (contexts-and-provenance-uris): multiple contexts and provenance-uris [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-79 (provenance-uri-contract): what is the contract associated with provenance-uris [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-80 (about-provenance-template): Query about provenance template [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

PROV-ISSUE-81 (identity-clash-scope): In a given scope, are entities with same identifier but different attributes legal? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-82 (pidm-event): Should we introduce a notion of event in the data model? [Conceptual Model]

PROV-ISSUE-84 (namespace-for-properties): What should namespace for properties be? [Formal Model]

PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 01 Sep 2011

PROV-WG Telecon Agenda 25 August 2011

Provenance context URIs for RDF data (was: PAQ document update, target renamed as context)

provenance model document

Provenance model document is over-complicated and hard to understand

Provenance requirements for RDF named graphs

Regrets ...

regrets for telecon 8/18, 8/25, and stakeholder questionnaire status update

relation <--> property

scribe required for teleconference

Straw Poll - Naming the Provenance Standard

Telecon Agenda Aug 11, 2011

Telecon Agenda Aug 18, 2011

test message please ignore

Updated stakeholders survey on wiki, need to compile list of communities to inform when survey goes live

updates to PAQ doc for discussion

views, complements and invariants (was: updates to PAQ doc for discussion)

vote on replacement for BOB (deadline: Wednesday 03 Aug 8am GMT)

Weekly Connection Task Force Call - each Monday

Last message date: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 17:35:27 UTC