W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > June 2012

Re: PROV-ISSUE-395: Rename hadOriginalSource to "originatedFrom"? [prov-dm]

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 13:43:32 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJCyKRp3O0=f_tKBK=bbzN-GYdMWp5L+VrZssBNmmxxHi87yyw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Yes. It remains as such.

Thanks
Paul

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> hasPrimarySource or hadPrimarySource?
>
> Is the definition remaining unchanged beyond s/original/primary/ ?
>
> Luc
>
> On 06/06/2012 12:25 PM, Paul Groth wrote:
>> I believe that the consensus is to rename it to PrimarySource.
>>
>> hasPrimarySource
>>
>> Is that correct, Jim, Tim.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Paul
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Luc Moreau<L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Paul, Tim, Jim, all,
>>>
>>> What's the consensus on this? What definition and name do you want to
>>> adopt for this
>>> relation?
>>>
>>> Luc
>>>
>>> On 06/05/2012 08:35 PM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, this is what I was thinking as well.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Jim McCusker<mccusj@rpi.edu>    wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> hadPrimarySource is much clearer. Anyone who has paid attention in history
>>>>> class (at least in the US) should be familiar with the idea of primary
>>>>> sources, so I think it's probably the most useful term.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Paul Groth<p.t.groth@vu.nl>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi TIm,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think i'm bending your way. If other's think primary source is more
>>>>>> intelligible then I'm happy to change this.
>>>>>> I think Luc also finally "got' this relation when I pointed him to the
>>>>>> wiki page so maybe that says something as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> cheers
>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Timothy Lebo<lebot@rpi.edu>    wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is the same intent as the google definition of original source in
>>>>>>>> my reading of their post. I would consider  primary source but think
>>>>>>>> original source has some history of usage on the web already.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where on the web is "original source" used?
>>>>>>> Blogging?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anywhere else?
>>>>>>> I'm not a blogger, and I haven't seen "original source".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> cheers
>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Timothy Lebo<lebot@rpi.edu>    wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, orginalsource had the meaning
>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh, did we shift from the meaning taken from that Google Blog about
>>>>>>>>> journalism ?
>>>>>>>>> (which, I can't find in any public draft, so I guess "yes"…)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I like the description at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source
>>>>>>>>>       __much__ better,
>>>>>>>>> I had no idea that that was the intent of hadOriginalSource.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since wikipedia choose the name "primary", perhaps we should too.
>>>>>>>>> I would be in favor of renaming:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>        hadOriginalSource ->    hadPrimarySource
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Now that I understand the concept, I'd rather this than the
>>>>>>>>> "originatedFrom", which is drastically different.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> To me a "big change" now is changing stuff that has been in the spec
>>>>>>>>>> in a number of drafts. I won't really argue hard but I want to be
>>>>>>>>>> convinced that this is worth it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's reasonable. But perhaps it indicates that the bigger problems
>>>>>>>>> are out of the way now :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Tim
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Timothy Lebo<lebot@rpi.edu>    wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:54 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Tim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think hadOriginalSource and originatedFrom convey the same
>>>>>>>>>>>> meaning.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think that they are pretty close in meaning, and one follows the
>>>>>>>>>>> naming style more appropriately.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I am also a bit concerned about doing these big renames of
>>>>>>>>>>>> things.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How do you measure "big"?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Tim
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tracker
>>>>>>>>>>>> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>    wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> PROV-ISSUE-395: Rename hadOriginalSource to "originatedFrom"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [prov-dm]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/395
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On product: prov-dm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> DM editors,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could hadOriginalSource be renamed to "originatedFrom" ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it follows the "wasDerivedFrom" naming a little more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> closely, and avoids an exception to PROV-O's "has" naming convention.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, perhaps the Involvement "Source" could be renamed "Origin"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And qualifiedSource would become qualifiedOrigin.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that this naming is a little more natural.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (yes, this is phrased in terms of PROV-O, but an issue on DM;
>>>>>>>>>>>>> probably best product would be mapping prov-dm<->      prov-o...)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
>>>>>>>>>>>> Assistant Professor
>>>>>>>>>>>> Knowledge Representation&    Reasoning Group
>>>>>>>>>>>> Artificial Intelligence Section
>>>>>>>>>>>> Department of Computer Science
>>>>>>>>>>>> VU University Amsterdam
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
>>>>>>>>>> Assistant Professor
>>>>>>>>>> Knowledge Representation&    Reasoning Group
>>>>>>>>>> Artificial Intelligence Section
>>>>>>>>>> Department of Computer Science
>>>>>>>>>> VU University Amsterdam
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
>>>>>>>> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
>>>>>>>> Assistant Professor
>>>>>>>> Knowledge Representation&    Reasoning Group
>>>>>>>> Artificial Intelligence Section
>>>>>>>> Department of Computer Science
>>>>>>>> VU University Amsterdam
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
>>>>>> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
>>>>>> Assistant Professor
>>>>>> Knowledge Representation&    Reasoning Group
>>>>>> Artificial Intelligence Section
>>>>>> Department of Computer Science
>>>>>> VU University Amsterdam
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim McCusker
>>>>> Programmer Analyst
>>>>> Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
>>>>> Yale School of Medicine
>>>>> james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330
>>>>> http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu
>>>>>
>>>>> PhD Student
>>>>> Tetherless World Constellation
>>>>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
>>>>> mccusj@cs.rpi.edu
>>>>> http://tw.rpi.edu
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
--
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group
Artificial Intelligence Section
Department of Computer Science
VU University Amsterdam
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 11:44:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:16 UTC