- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:54:16 -0400
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Luc, On Apr 11, 2012, at 5:56 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Tim, > > My understanding of the location attribute is restrictive. > This is how I also specified the current XML schema. Okay. > > 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? So does restating "The attribute prov:location is an optional attribute of entity and activity" to "The attribute prov:location is an optional attribute of entity, activity, usage, and generation." sound reasonable? If so, I think it would address this issue and we can close it. Regards, Tim > > 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 22:54:48 UTC