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

Re: Mini-mini comment on prov-dm

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 16:00:42 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJCyKRr2dnK5iZWb8xuR2mROCvdG9jaAc_Hg-Rr+XUSHnmF4=A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Ivan,

It's an interesting comment about modeling the process. It's important
to remember we don't represent eventualities in provenance only what
has happened. So we would only model that W3C management agrees and a
publication occurs.

We mention this somewhere but it's probably not clear enough…


On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> I see that the Prov-DM uses the W3C publication process as an example. Some of the terms referred to in the document actually exist, better use those:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54.rdf
> I know it is a bit sketchy, and should be updated, but it is a start. There is at least a class for WD, PR, etc.
> Challenge: model the whole W3C publication process with Prov-O... looking at this what I tried to describe (and I did not really succeed) is to interpret things like: a some publications occur only when the W3C management agrees, on a transition call, that the document is fine for publication (which is the case for, eg, Candidate Recommendations...)
> Ivan
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
Assistant Professor
Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group
Artificial Intelligence Section
Department of Computer Science
VU University Amsterdam
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 14:01:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:14 UTC