Re: PROV-ISSUE-437 (prov-dm-post-f2f3-review): Final review before last call vote [prov-dm]

On Jul 5, 2012, at 12:48 PM, James Cheney wrote:

>> 
>> Question for reviewers: Can the document be published as Last Call working draft?
> 
> Yes, but please take note of suggestions below.
> 
> 0. I don't understand the rationale for deciding who is an author.  I believe it is up to the editors, but there are some things that I've helped with here, and I'm not listed (examples: definitions of specialization/alternate, and semicolon syntax for optional identifiers).  I haven't directly written much so wouldn't fight to be included, but at this point I have probably done more than for PROV-O, where I am listed as an author. (I also wouldn't fight to stay listed there but am happy to stay listed.)
> 
> Also, should some of the authors of PROV-DM also be listed on PROV-N or PROV-CONSTRAINTS, since they were split up?  Having become an editor of the latter only recently, I would like to make sure we credit people that contributed to it.
> 
> 1. S5, "itself dependen on" - spelling
> 
> 2.  Table 5 and sec. 5.6.2:  I have trouble reading "memberOf(c,{e1,...,en})" - the elements e1,...,en are members of c, not the other way around.  
> 
> Moreover, I don't understand why memberOf needs to be so complex, with an id and attributes, if it is just a "hook" for linking up with other vocabularies that have membership.  Why not just "memberOf(element, collection)"?  This is what I thought we agreed at f2f3.  We could also omit EmptyCollection and the completeness flag.

+1 memberOf(element, collection) (and a sugary membersOf({e,e,e}, collection)

> 
> 3.  Figure 7 and 7b: I suggest renumbering, or renaming "Figure 7" to "Figure 7a"
> 
> 4.  S5.3.5.  "capacity an entity" -> "capacity of an entity"
> 
> 5.  Example 45.  I am afraid I don't understand how the current definition of mentionOf accommodates the example.  Why doesn't bondle tool:analysis1 rate the two activities Bob was associated with (or the associations themselves) rather than rating (different mentions of) Bob?
> 
> 6.  In example 46 (which I'm also not sure I understand, but never mind), the bundles in mentionOf are the second arguments, I think they should be third.
> 
> 7.  I would also suggest that the bundle in mentionOf should be mandatory, not optional.

+1 (from the hip) Is this just an artifact of the definition moving around, most recently the optional argument of specializationOf?


-Tim



> -- 
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
> 
> 
>