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

PROV-ISSUE-198: Section 6.1 (PROV-DM as on Dec 5) [prov-dm]

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 02:19:12 +0000
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1RY76G-0007Ne-Li@tibor.w3.org>

PROV-ISSUE-198: Section 6.1 (PROV-DM as on Dec 5) [prov-dm]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/198

Raised by: Satya Sahoo
On product: prov-dm

Hi,
The following are my comments for Section 6.1 of the PROV-DM (as on Dec 5):

Section 6.1
1. "The relations introduced here are all specializations of the wasDerivedFrom relation, specifically precise-1 or imprecise-1. They are designed to model:
* insertion: a collection entity c' is obtained from collection entity c, by adding entity e having key k to c;
* removal: a collection entity c' is obtained from collection entity c, by removing entity e having key k from c;
* selection: an entity e was selected from collection c using key k."

Comment: The relevance of the Collection and these related properties in PROV-DM is not clear. I am not sure why indexing structures should be part of the Data Model. In addition, the above list has highly domain-specific methods and should be either removed completely or removed to Best Practices document if needed. For example, one can make the case for modeling wasAddedTo_Agent, wasRemovedFrom_Entity, wasModifiedIn_Entity etc.

2. "Record: wasAddedTo_Coll(c2,c1) (resp. wasRemovedFrom_Coll(c2,c1)) denotes that collection c2 is an updated version of collection c1, following an insertion (resp. deletion) operation."

Comment: Why can't this be expressed using "wasDerivedFrom" or revision?

Thanks.

Best,
Satya
Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2011 02:19:14 UTC

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