- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:12:46 +0000
- To: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- 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: <EMEW3|67eb5b3e3f23c3948c8e519589b5252bo1CACq08L.Moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4F38E21E>
Hi Tim, Correction: introduction of section 5.2.4 [1] mentions trust service. [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#record-note Luc On 02/13/2012 06:02 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Tim, > Sorry, I thought you meant motivation in general, as opposed to in the > text. > This can be added if it helps the case. > > Professor Luc Moreau > Electronics and Computer Science > University of Southampton > Southampton SO17 1BJ > United Kingdom > > On 13 Feb 2012, at 01:12, "Timothy Lebo" <lebot@rpi.edu > <mailto:lebot@rpi.edu>> wrote: > >> 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 >>> <mailto: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 >>>>> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 10:15:17 UTC