- From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:27:42 +0100
- To: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Tracker, this is now ISSUE-274 On 15/02/2012 17:42, Curt Tilmes wrote: > Luc, > > I've read the "Working Draft 4". > > I like the division between the parts. It achieved the goal of making > the DM easier to understand within Part 1. (I still need to spend > some time with Part 2 to understand more of it :-). > > It may be premature, but I also kept some notes on minor/cosmetic > stuff I saw as I went through it (appended). None of these are really > blockers or major issues, just some thoughts. > > Curt > > ====================================================================== > > PROV-DM Part 1 > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/towards-wd4.html > > > Many places in this document have "inter-operability" I think it is > more common to simply use "interoperability". > > > 2.1 "An activity is anything that involves entities; this involvement > can take multiple forms: consuming them, processing them, transforming > them, modifying them, changing them, relocating them, using them, > generating them, being associated with them, etc. Activities that > operate on digital entities may for example move, copy, or duplicate > them." > > Maybe cut down the list of things, merging "transforming them, > modifying them, changing them" to just "transforming them"? > > I also think "involves" could be slightly too broad. How about > "acts/action"? > > "An activity is anything that acts upon or with entities; this > action can take multiple forms: ..." > > > "An agents is a particular type of Entity." > > An agent is... > > > "For example, a software for checking the use of grammar" > > I would probably say "software for checking ..." instead of "a > software for checking ...", but that might just be an American > Englishism. > > > 2.2 "Generation is the completed production of a new entity by > activity. > > ... by an activity. > > > "This entity become available for usage after this generation." > > ...entity becomes available... > > > "Usage is the beginning on an entity being consumed by an > activity. Before usage, the activity had not begun to consume or use > to this entity (and could not have been affected by the entity)." > > ...beginning of an entity... > > ...or use this entity... > > > "In some case, the consumption of entity influences the creation of > another in some way." > > ...consumption of an entity... > > > "Examples of derivation include the transformation of a relational > table into a linked data set, the transformation of a canvas into a > painting, the transportation of a person from London to New York, and > a physical transformation such as the melting of ice into water." > > The other examples make sense to me, but the "transportation of a > person" example is particularly conceptually jarring for me. Even > if we can envision such a thing being an appropriate derivation, I > would remove it from the examples here, sticking with examples > that are easier for readers to relate with. > > > 2.3 "A Plan is an entity that represent a set of actions..." > > ...represents... > > > "PROV-DM is not prescriptive about the nature of plans, their > representation, the actions and steps they consist of, and their > intended goals." > > change ands to ors: > > PROV-DM is not prescriptive about the nature of plans, their > representation, the actions or steps they consist of, or their > intended goals. > > > "... to track their provenance, and hence, plans are entities." > > ... to track their provenance, so plans themselves are entities. > > > "...which document it contained..." > > ...which documents it contained... > > > 2.4 "...it may not matter what programmer clicked the button to start > the workflow while it would matter a lot what researcher told the > programmer to do so." > > ...which programmer... > ...which researcher... > > > "The nature of this relation is intended to be broad, and includes > delegation, contractual relation" > > This sentence seems to be cut off, perhaps other examples were > intended? Could just end it there: > > ...to be broad, including delegation or a contractual relation. > > > "it may not matter what student published" > > ...which student... > > > 4.1.3 "There are three types of agents in the model since they are > common across most anticipated domain of use:" > > ...anticipated domains of use... > > > 4.1.4 note(ex:n2,[ex:reputation:"excellent"]) > > last ':' should be '=' > > > > 4.2.2.1 "The first, introduced in this section, is relation between an > agent..." > > ...is a relation... > > > "An activity association, written wasAssociatedWith(id,a,ag2,pl,attrs) > in PROV-ASN,..." > > 'ag2' could just be 'ag' -- that would be sufficient to > distinguish activity from agent. > > > 4.3.3.3 prov:steps > > "The attribute prov:steps defines the level of precision associated > with a derivation. The value associated with a prov:steps attribute > must be "single" or "any". The attribute prov:step occurs at most once > in a derivation. A derivation without attribute prov:step is > considered to be equivalent to the same derivation extended with an > extra attribute prov:step and associated value "any"." > > Some places use "prov:steps", some "prov:step". > > > 5.4 Traceability > > In the example, this: > > tracedTo(tr:WD-prov-dm-20111215,w3:Consortium) > > appears to trace from an entity to an agent, but the definition > appears limited to entity->entity traceability. > > I can see the value in tracing entities to agents if we want to > allow that, otherwise remove example with agent. > > > 5.7 Original Source > > I agree with PM note. What is the use case for this? > > > ====================================================================== > > Part II > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/prov-dm-constraints.html > > > 2.1.1 "...after which it no longer becomes available for use." > > ...after which it is no longer avaiable for use. > > > 2.2 "Indeed, we previously defined entities are things in the world > one wants to provide provenance for;" > > ...defined entities as things... > > > 2.3 "...can be made from descriptoins conformant..." > > ...descriptions... > > > 7. " Section 5 introduce constraints on descriptions..." > > ...introduces... > > > ====================================================================== > > Part III > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/prov-asn.html > > > > Relation "PROV-DM relatiosn can be generation..." > > ...relations... > > > ======================================================================
Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 05:29:25 UTC