- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 09:51:51 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|7c11d01e23973ee35268db217e6f25b2o339py08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F7C0BA7>
Hi Simon, Yolanda, The primer reads nicely. It seems to have captured the right set of concepts and explained them at the right level. There was a discussion of whether collections should be included in the primer. I don't believe so. My comment is related to what I said about the prov-o document: if collections are added to the primer, I think it would give too much importance to this concept and associated relations. There should be a *separate* HOWTO document on collections. From my viewpoint, the only change I would like to see implemented before release is the introduction of a figure (compliant with PROV "style") illustrating the example. Note: one or more figures left to editorial discretion. I also believe that the PRIMER should not focus just on rdf representation but on the others too. The prov-n examples in appendix are not very satisfactory. Instead, buttons showing/hiding examples in rdf, xml, prov-n should be used. Text also will have to be changed at many places accordingly. I am OK if this change takes place after this release (synchronized with last call). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Questions: - In constrast to the DM and PROV-O, the primer talks about "roles" rather than "qualified involvement" in general. The rationale is that it is a more intuitive starting point for readers new to PROV. However, two (internal WG) reviewers have both suggested that "qualified involvement" should be discussed instead. What is your opinion? I don't understand this question. Roles are presented here as provdm:roles. This seems OK to me. - Do you think the document is accessible to all the major communities who would want to adopt PROV or, if not, where are the deficiencies? I think so. - Can the document be released as a next public working draft? If no, what are the blocking issues? Yes to be released, but with a figure illustrating the example. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Minor comments: - abstract: I am not sure about the use of "non-normative". We should not consider this document as less normative than the others simply because it is a W3C NOTE (which is an artifact of the charter creation) The term 'normative' is used several times. - Likewise, I don't think you should use the word 'standard'. Instead use 'specification'. - section 1: "its representation in the PROV Ontology" I don't think we are representing the data model in the ontology. We express it, we map it? - personally, I don't like the use of "you/your". It occurs so few times that it could be removed. - section 2: this not an ER diagram but a UML class diagram I believe. - section 2.2: first occurrence of the word 'attribute'. Should we have seen it before? - section 2.3: '... generate entities mid-way through occuring'???? - section 2.4: agent ... "... take an active role ..." we dropped active from the prov-dm definition. - of a that chart - 2.6: an description -> a description - section 3: title to change when using other representations - section 3.5: "was controlled by" (also used elsewhere) we move away from control. Should another term be used? - section 3.6: "she contacts the government" ;-) brave Betty! -> "she contacts the government agency" - section 3.7. I find the example of plan a bit ambiguous, since one could see the corrections as an input to the editing process. But then, it's not corrections, but correction instructions, but the prefixed name is ex:corrections. So as a minimum, it should be ex:instructions. Maybe, to avoid ambiguity, the plan could be a new methodology to generate data. - appendix A: prov-n snippets: _ should be - - type is missing for some literals "prov:Person" %% xsd:QName - "prov:dataToCompose" -> "ex:dataToCompose" - "prov:regionsToAggregteBy" -> "ex:regionsToAggregATEBY" On 04/01/2012 07:35 PM, Miles, Simon wrote: > Hello, > The primer is ready for review by the WG, ahead of the next release. > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html > Thanks, > Simon > Dr Simon Miles > Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics > Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK > +44 (0)20 7848 1166 > Electronically querying for the provenance of entities: > http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/61/ -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2012 08:52:25 UTC