- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:56:41 +0000
- To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- CC: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Tim, My understanding of the location attribute is restrictive. This is how I also specified the current XML schema. I also think it's inline with our way of handling time. E.g. We said we didn't want prov:time on entity. Thoughts? Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom On 11 Apr 2012, at 20:47, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: > Luc, > > > On Apr 11, 2012, at 12:30 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > >> Hi Tim, >> >> I don't think there has been suggestion that the location attribute applies to other classes. You are making a good case for usage and generation. > > Thanks. > >> >> What else? > > I would be happy with just adding Usage and Generation. It covers the cases that I can think of. > >> Everything? Note sure this works for Quotation, OriginalSource, Attribution, Association, Responsibility …. > > None of these make sense upon a cursory consideration. > > > > However, part of my question was: > >>> Is it acceptable to view the DM's current statement as non-restrictive? > > So, even if you do add Usage and Generation to the list with Entitiy and Activity, can someone conformant-ly put a location on something else? > > Thanks, > Tim > > >> >> >> Professor Luc Moreau >> Electronics and Computer Science >> University of Southampton >> Southampton SO17 1BJ >> United Kingdom >> >> On 10 Apr 2012, at 22:58, "Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> PROV-ISSUE-342 (location-of-usage): prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity - others okay? [prov-dm] >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/342 >>> >>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo >>> On product: prov-dm >>> >>> 4.7.4.2 prov:location >>> >>> states: >>> >>> "The attribute prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity. " >>> >>> does this imply that it is NOT an attribute of any other class? >>> >>> I imagine that it might be useful to specify the location of a usage, which would be more specific than the location of the using activity. e.g., "The party happened at Sarah's. The cake was cut with a knife in the kitchen." To mention "kitchen" for the usage, prov:location seems natural. >>> >>> Is it acceptable to view the DM's current statement as non-restrictive? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 21:57:35 UTC