- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:07:54 -0500
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <2C2BF004-13A6-404C-93A9-04B7A56B507B@rpi.edu>
Luc, I can only find Note examples with visual styling ("dotted", "icons", etc). Is there a "trust" Note example somewhere? Thanks, Tim On Feb 12, 2012, at 5:29 PM, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Tim, > Yes we use such notes to also propagate "trust" information > > Professor Luc Moreau > Electronics and Computer Science > University of Southampton > Southampton SO17 1BJ > United Kingdom > > On 12 Feb 2012, at 20:54, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: > >> Is there motivation for Notes other than to sneak messages to the visual layer? >> >> note(ann1,[ex:color="blue", ex:screenX=20, ex:screenY=30]) >> It seems to me that this is simply data modeling and NOT provenance modeling. >> If it is _only_ data modeling, I think that it should stay out of PROV, which should focus on modeling only provenance. >> >> >> Underneath the surface of Notes is the age old debate of "characterizing attributes" versus "non-characterizing attributes". >> >> -Tim >> >> >> On Feb 12, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Paul Groth wrote: >> >>> Of course you can use constructs however you want. I don't think Note was intended as such so it seems that discussing this usage would be out of scope. >>> >>> Why confuse potential adopters of the spec? >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> On Feb 12, 2012, at 21:15, Daniel Garijo <dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es> wrote: >>> >>>> There was some discussion on the prov-o team about this. "Note" could be used for describing provenance >>>> statements in an informal way with custom annotations. >>>> Therefore, IMO some people could use it for metadata provenance even if that is not the intention on DM. >>>> For example: I could add annotations about all the usages (since the note is about a record) stating who is the author >>>> of that assertion. >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Daniel >>>> >>>> 2012/2/12 Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I was just having a look through the ProvRDF mappings page: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF >>>> >>>> In the Note section there is a concern "but NOT for the much heavier-duty use that DM offers (meta-provenance)." >>>> >>>> The DM does not use Note for meta provenance so I don't know where this is coming from. >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> Paul >>>> >>>> >>
Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 01:12:22 UTC