- From: Eric <ericphb@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:32:45 -0700
- To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>, Eric G Stephan <Eric.Stephan@pnnl.gov>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Yes please do so and thank you.w Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: >Eric, > >Thanks for your review of the PROV-O HTML. > >All of your comments have either been handled, overcome by events, or overlap with other existing issues which we are working to address. > >May we close this issue? > >Responses within. > >Regards, >Tim > > > >“PROV Ontology” and “PROV ontology” are used interchangeably >throughout the document. Since “PROV Ontology” is the formal name we >should be consistent. > >>>>> TL: Thanks. I made this uniform. > > >Section 2.1: > >“As a reader I thought it would be helpful to have a link on the >“Abstract Syntax Notation (ASN) to take me directly to >http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111018/#prov-asn--the-provenance-abstract-syntax-notation >explaining the motivation behind using ASN. The above referenced >section in PROV-DM does a great job of briefly providing the >rationale. > > >>>>> TL: Thanks for pointing this out, it highlighted a few hiccups in the current draft. >>>> I've noted this at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-o_draft_review_2_April_2012#Eric and will manage it from there. > > > >Section 3.1 > >Direct links corresponding from PROV-O class to PROV-DM model element >would make references between the two documents more intuitive. > >E.g. > >Class Description >Entity is defined to be "An Entity represents an identifiable >characterized thing." >[http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111018/#expression-Entity] > > >>>>> TL: Thanks for the suggestion. It is noted at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-o_draft_review_2_April_2012 and will be handled soon. The links are in the ontology, we just need to expose them into the HTML via the cross reference script. > > > > > > > 3.1.6 > >I was confused between the Class definition of location (geographic >location) and the example which was a directory path. If we are >going to include directory paths then the definition of location needs >to be more general. > >Comment on concern about “geospatial”: Geospatial tends to be used to >refer to geographic data that is most likely used for processing or >analysis as opposed to something that is displayed on a map. >Recommend defer to the existing ISO standard definition. > > >>>>> TL: This is http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/128 ISSUE-128 and we'll be handling it there soon. > > > > > >On Feb 10, 2012, at 8:18 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > >> PROV-ISSUE-250 (TLebo): respond to Eric's comments [Ontology] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/250 >> >> Raised by: Timothy Lebo >> On product: Ontology >> >> Eric has provided some comments on the PROVO HTML document. >> >> We need to respond to his comments. >> >> http://www.w3.org/mid/CAMFz4jjE=hz-Pn4uqMN2xf5iCL6kqsW0qBUE2ehoZAF_n5=kEA@mail.gmail.com >> >> >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2012 16:33:27 UTC