Re: Query and access F2F document template

Simon, I think this is in line with what I have in mind.  I'm intending to spend 
some time tomorrow (Thursday) on this.

#g
--

Simon Miles wrote:
> Graham,
> 
> Thanks. Yes, I agree your scope limitation and the two cases suggested
> make sense, at least with regard to explaining POWDER's approach.
> 
> As for terminology, please feel free to raise specific concerns. My
> feeling is that we would ideally write something which can immediately
> make sense to someone developing a web client application which
> provides access to the provenance of data it manipulates, which I take
> to mean using language intuitive for the web in general but also not
> being ambiguous. Any suggestion in meeting this ideal is gratefully
> received.
> 
> Thanks,
> Simon
> 
> On 6 June 2011 09:53, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> wrote:
>> Simon,
>>
>> I've made a note to come up with something.  In the first instance, I imagine it
>> being very scope-limited, and may be hedged with operational restrictions, but I
>> think that's in line with your approach.
>>
>> Specifically, I think there are two cases to consider initially:
>> (1) given the URI of any document retrieved via HTTP, to obtain its provenance
>> (2) given an HTML document obtained by any means, to obtain its provenance
>>
>> (I'm still a little concerned/confused by the way that the terminology of
>> resources and representations is being used, but I propose to prepare something
>> concrete then figure how it sits with the terminological approach.)
>>
>> #g
>> --
>>
>>
>> Simon Miles wrote:
>>> Hello all (and A&Q TF especially),
>>>
>>> Yogesh, the WG chairs and I would like to propose a skeleton for the
>>> document that the query and access TF will supply for the F2F1
>>> meeting.
>>>
>>> A key aspect of this document is that, due to the short time before
>>> the meeting, it is deliberately narrow in scope.  As agreed following
>>> Olaf's prior proposals, we want to build on the incubator group
>>> chapter 6, by taking aims and assumptions from that document.
>>> However, we've reduced these to two key questions (suggested by Luc)
>>> for the F2F1:
>>>  1. Given the identity, I, of a resource state representation and a
>>> location, L, from which to retrieve provenance, how do we obtain the
>>> provenance of the representation from the location?
>>>  2. How can a browser find I and L (as above) for an HTML document
>>> that was downloaded, so that its provenance may be retrieved?
>>>
>>> Please see the rest of the document skeleton for details:
>>>   http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Access_and_Query_Proposal
>>>
>>> We welcome any comments on the skeleton structure proposed, including
>>> the scope decided for this document.
>>>
>>> One specific request to Graham: you suggested Section 4 of the POWDER
>>> as providing a solution for the above questions (at least with regard
>>> to HTTP, HTML, ATOM). It looks straightforward enough to me what such
>>> a solution would look like (the same as described in the POWDER
>>> proposal but with provenance specific MIME types?), but it would be
>>> very helpful if you could sketch the proposal on the Wiki page as you
>>> understand it best.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Simon
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
>> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 11:12:40 UTC