RE: PROV-ISSUE-410 (prov-primer-review): Feedback on Primer document [Primer]

Hi Luc,

Thanks very much for your review of the primer. I've addressed your comments, noting the following:

I've updated to the latest UML diagram from PROV-DM, but note that it includes wasInformedBy, which is not illustrated in the primer.

I've scaled wide figures to 95% page width as suggested, but there must be a cleaner solution for the future, to make them look neater and not require scaling that means figures end up with different size text.

Provenance of provenance (bundles) can be added in the next revision, when Yolanda adds the idea of multiple interoperable sources of provenance. I think that would make more sense than adding it to the current release.

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html

thanks,
Simon

Dr Simon Miles
Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics
Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
+44 (0)20 7848 1166

Transparent Provenance Derivation for User Decisions:
http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1400/
________________________________________
From: Luc Moreau [L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk]
Sent: 03 July 2012 09:41
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: PROV-ISSUE-410 (prov-primer-review): Feedback on Primer document   [Primer]

Hi Yolanda and Simon,

The primer is a very pleasant read, the right length, the right contents.
A few comments.  The document can be released as WD after the requested
changes have been incorporated.

For the questions.

Questions:
  - Is it intuitive, readable, and an appropriate introduction to the other documents?

+1

  - Do you judge it to be comprehensible to the range of communities that might use PROV?

I suppose so

  - Is the new way of presenting examples, with choice of format, helpful?

yes, I like it. Thanks.

  - Are the examples up to date with regard to PROV-O and PROV-N?

Some changes suggested below.



Section 1.

- Prov is a proposed specification to REPRESENT provenance --> to express
- we can perceive how to how use it ???
- Final report of the W3C provenance Incubator grop --> add as an
informative
   reference in the bibliography.

section 2.
- PROV-DM data model document -> PROV data model
- provides definitions and constraints --> for constraints, cite
prov-constraints.
- use latest UML diagram from prov-dm
- "This also affects the domain and range of the relations in PROV":
what do you mean?

section 2.3:
- title should be "USAGE and geneation". Replace use by  usage everywhere.
-I suggest adding:
"Likewise, usage does not always occur at the beginning of an activity."

section 2.5
- whether how ???

section 2.9
- "The following are examples illustrate this idea"  -> illustrating

section 3:
- "These samples use the namespace prefix prov DENOTES terms ..." ->
denoting?
- [PROV-N] productions -> [PROV-N] expressions

section 3.1:
- "Any entity may have attributes not specific to provenance" -> what do
you mean?
   they are all fixed attributes. Or do you mean attributes that are not
pre-defined
   by PROV?

Section 3.3:
- When printed, many pictures are truncated. Make their width 95% of the
page width.
- You may want to add that all edges point in a same direction "towards
the past"

Section 3.4 and elsewhere:
- prov:type="prov:Person"  -> prov:type='prov:Person'
- prov:type="prov:Organization"  -> prov:type='prov:Organization'
- indentation of prov-n examples is not the clearest. Can all attributes
be indented in
   the same way?
- prov:role="ex:dataToCompose"  -> prov:role='ex:dataToCompose'
    all qualified names literals should appear in single quotes


Section 3.6:
- wasRevisionOf(ex:dataSet2,ex:dataSet1) ->
   wasDerivedFrom(ex:dataSet2,ex:dataSet1, [prov:type='prov:Revision'])
   (twice)

Section 3.7
- prov-n example misses
   wasGeneratedBy(ex:dataSet2, ex:connect,-)


section 3.9:
- stating that it QUOTED from the article: not the clearest

- wasQuotedFrom(ex:blogEntry, ex:article) ->
   wasDerivedFrom(ex:blogEntry, ex:article, [prov:type='prov:Quotation']) ->

- turtle example misses:
  ex:articleV1 a prov:Entity

section 3.10
- we visualize the whoe example as a single BUNDLE ... did you really
mean bundle?

- Given the importance of provenance of provenance, could you indeed
complete
  the example by creating a bundle and giving its provenance.  That's
maybe the only
   thing missing in the primer.



On 14/06/12 16:24, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-410 (prov-primer-review): Feedback on Primer document  [Primer]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/410
>
> Raised by: Simon Miles
> On product: Primer
>
> This is the issue to collect feedback on the primer document.
>
> Document to review is available from:
>
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html
>
> Questions:
>   - Is it intuitive, readable, and an appropriate introduction to the other documents?
>   - Do you judge it to be comprehensible to the range of communities that might use PROV?
>   - Is the new way of presenting examples, with choice of format, helpful?
>   - Are the examples up to date with regard to PROV-O and PROV-N?
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
>
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 7 July 2012 14:15:38 UTC