W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > December 2011

Re: Examoples in primer

From: Simon Miles <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 12:42:11 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKc1nHcyC9-njLLdcM+gSxA5WhK0PLQfv3T2vt1dsA9AWpRz5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
With regards to the discussion below, I should have said, please raise
these points as issues if you think they require something to be
changed in the primer. I will bear them in mind but might forget to
address them or delay in doing so if they are not officially raised.

thanks,
Simon

On 1 December 2011 16:01, Miles, Simon <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk> wrote:
> Khalid, Paolo, Graham,
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> A "fully-fledged" example all in one section sounds a good idea (and
> you'll notice Section 3 is called Worked Examples in plural with
> something like this in mind). I agree with Graham that it is good to
> have a concise summary of concepts. I would also not want the primer
> centred entirely on an example. We could possibly reduce the size of
> the intro/intuition section so that the example appears sooner.
>
> On Khalid's other comments:
>
> The derivation relation probably could be introduced earlier, and I
> agree that it is important. This should be easier to achieve given the
> recent changes on derivation in the DM.
>
> Regardless of whether all entities are generated by activities (I
> think they are, and I think Jim Myers argued that it is this that
> characterized them), I think this is the easiest explanation of
> generation in the (non-normative) primer. But if you disagree, could
> you be more specific in your concerns?
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
>
> On 25 November 2011 16:45, Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Graham
>>
>> I completely agree with the incremental approach, I just thought it could be a nice "and here is a full-fledged example" section
>> towards the end.
>>
>> Not a problem though!
>>
>> -Paolo
>>
>>
>> On 11/25/11 12:20 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
>>> I have a nagging worry that if the Primer becomes dominated by the journalism
>>> example, we'll lose the concise but readable summary that is (IMO) invaluable
>>> for developers as both introduction and handy reference.
>>>
>>> The PROV-DM document doesn't really provide this IMO because it's very concerned
>>> with the details of the ASN and model constraints.  The primer currently could
>>> serve this role (e.g. as the OWL primer does for OWL), but I fear that if it is
>>> completely structured around the example, it will become more of a
>>> "painting-by-numbers" guide.
>>>
>>> I'm not necessarily saying that the journalism example should not be present.
>>> But I really like the focused and progressive introduction of example material
>>> which to my mind really backs up the Primer's role as a primer.
>>>
>>> #g
>>> --
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr Simon Miles
> Lecturer, Department of Informatics
> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
>
> Modelling the Provenance of Data in Autonomous Systems:
> http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1264/
>
>



-- 
Dr Simon Miles
Lecturer, Department of Informatics
Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
+44 (0)20 7848 1166

Modelling the Provenance of Data in Autonomous Systems:
http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1264/
Received on Sunday, 4 December 2011 12:42:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:04 UTC