- 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