- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 12:38:39 -0500
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
I am content with how the following statements address the relation between DM literal and RDFS Literal: " A PROV-DM Literal represents a value whose interpretation is outside the scope of PROV-DM. " "In particular, a PROV-DM Literal may be a URI-typed string (with datatype xsd:anyURI), or URI-denoted resource (with datatype rdf:Resource); in either case; such URI has no specific interpretation in the context of PROV-DM." The language and datatyping grammar seems a bit excessive, but I have no objections. Regards, Tim On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:19 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Tim, Stephan, Jim, > > Here is a first draft of the literal section. > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#record-literal > > It would be good to have your feedback. > If you find it's ok, than the literals examples in the document need to be checked. > > Cheers, > Luc > > On 07/11/11 18:15, Jim McCusker wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Paolo Missier<Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk> wrote: >> >>> DM says: >>> >>> 5.5.5 Literal >>> >>> Literals represent data values such as particular string or integers. >>> >>> My understanding is it's always been used in the standard grammar production >>> meaning (eg: http://savage.net.au/SQL/sql-2003-2.bnf.html#literal). Not so? >>> >> I think a clearer definition would be: >> >> A Provenance Literal is a "leaf" value. It does not explicitly have >> any outgoing relations (in SW-ish: Is not a subject of any statement) >> in the PROV data model. Any outgoing relations from a Provenance >> Literal is out of scope for the PROV DM. >> >> Jim >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 22 November 2011 17:39:08 UTC