- From: Sam Coppens <Sam.Coppens@UGent.be>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 18:21:56 +0200
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hello all, Below, you can find my review of the PROV-AQ document. It is a good document and I consider it ready for publication as public working draft. Thumbs up for the editors. -------------------- PROV-AQ Review The document gives a good description of the access and query mechanisms for provenance information. It is well structured and easily understandable, including the service specification. I propose to make a it available as public working draft. I have some concerns and remarks, but they should not stop the publication of the document as public working draft. I raise no issues, but if the remarks are considered relevant, feel free to do so. I propose one addition: I would consider the ability to do round-trips (Going from the resource to its provenance information and back to the resource.) When provenance information is accessed using the HTTP protocol, the response of the accessed provenance infromation must then also include an HTTP header denoting the the subject of the provenance information. E.g. Link: target-URI; rel="isProvenanceFor"; anchor="provenance-uri". The same can be done for provenance information accessed via REST services or resources represented in HTML or RDF. Maybe there is a good reason not to do this, but then I would include this motivation into the document. I propose some modifications: Section 1.1: The term resource needs some clarification. I would indicate that a resource can be: an information resource or a non-information resource. (This already implies that the resource URI can be dereferencable or not.) This makes explicit that provenance can be recorded for non-information resources (e.g. a person) and for information resources (e.g. an RDF representation of that person or an HTML representation of that person, etc.) Section 3.4: Composite object-packaging formats. ORE and MPEG-21 DIDL are usually not packaged into ZIP archives, their datastreams sometimes are for storage reasons. BagIt is a sort of `self-descriptive` ZIP archive by specification, meant to be transmitted over the Web (e.g. it includes checksum information of the included datastreams for validation after transmission). Also Mets might be considered more relevant these days then MPEG-21 DIDL in the digital library and archive community. Section 4.2: ..., defined by the provenance ontology [PROV-O]. The specified RDF object properties, e.g., prov:ProvenanceService, are at this moment not specified by PROV-O. Thus, PROV-O and PROV-AQ are out of sync. Section 7: ... secure HTTP (https) should be used. Why `should`? Shouldn`t this be `may`, and if not, why? Now it seems provenance information should always be retrieved using https. Some spelling corrections: Section 3.2: The target-uri given by the anchor link element specifies an identifier for the document ... instead of ...specifies an specifies an identifier ...
Received on Friday, 20 April 2012 16:22:28 UTC