- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 08:21:00 -0500
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Luc, Thanks for considering. I was making the suggestion based on the small group of readers trying to understand the DM; it helped make it more consumable. -Tim On Mar 5, 2012, at 3:27 AM, Luc Moreau wrote: > Hi Tim > > I suppose you mean the notation wasGeneratedBy([id],e,[a],[t],[attrs]) > instead of wasGeneratedBy(id,e,a,t,attrs). > > We discussed this with Paolo and we don't feel it's suitable since whenever > we write wasGeneratedBy(id,e,a,t,attrs), we mean an instance of the data model. > > If we want to identify the optional nature of an attribute, we need to look at the > grammar, not at an instance. > > Luc > > PS. The square brackets around attributes do not mark they are optional, they are > part of the syntax. > > On 03/02/2012 01:56 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote: >> I would like to propose that the DM editors consider adopting the notation used in ProvRDF, since the PROV-O team found it easier to work with and we believe that others will find it easier as well. >> >> > > -- > 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, 5 March 2012 13:21:36 UTC