Re: provenance of provenance

Hi Tim,
Some comment below.

On 05/15/2012 08:34 PM, Timothy Lebo wrote:
> Luc,
>
> Regarding 
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd6-bundle.html
>
>
> Regarding proposal:
>
> +0 to dropping 'account'
> +0 to introducing 'bundle' to rename 'account' (I think 'account' is a 
> satisfactory name and is more "provenance-y" than the mechanical 
> notion of 'bundle'; note that 'bundle' was first introduced only to 
> distinguish itself from the construct-heave 'account' at the time.)
> +1 to dropping hasAnnotation and Note
> +1 to adding the component on bundles (I'm leaning towards 'account' 
> now that we've shucked the heavy widgets it once had.)
>
> (I'm happy with either 'bundle' or 'account')
>
>
> Comments on the actual text is below.
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
>
> 1)
>
> "As a named bundle is a set of descriptions"
> ->
> "As a bundle is a named set of descriptions"
> ?
>
>
>
> 2)
> "bundle uuid:03" looks inconsistent with "agg:bundle3"

yes, it was a relic of a past version.
>
> 3)
>
> After:
> "hasProvenanceIn(ex:report1, -, -, -, 
> "http://example.com/some-provenance.pn"^xsd:anyURI)"
>
> Could we add another example where your Provenance-URI itself defines 
> a bundle?
>
> hasProvenanceIn(ex:report1, ex:bundle34, -, -, "http://example.com/some-provenance.pn"^xsd:anyURI)
>

OK that can be added. I am concerned about the already large number of 
examples in this section.

>
> 4)
> Can you make the visualization tool use its own URIs for the graphics 
> depicting the reports?
>
>    entity(ex:report1, [viz:color="orange"])
>    hasProvenanceIn(ex:report1, obs:bundle7, -, -, -)
>
>    entity(ex:report2, [viz:color="blue"])
>    hasProvenanceIn(ex:report2, obs:bundle7, -, -, -)
> ->
>    entity(tool:graphic1, [viz:color="orange"])
>    hasProvenanceIn(tool:graphic1, obs:bundle7, ex:report1, -, -)
>
>    entity(tool:graphic2, [viz:color="blue"])
>    hasProvenanceIn(ex:graphic2, obs:bundle7, ex:report2, -, -)
>
We could, but there is nothing in the model that forbids the current 
example, is there?


>
> 5)
>
> Why is it necessary that:
>
> "it is necessary for it to have an identifier in the first place (ex:d)."
>
>

I am updating the text as follows.  Does clarify the issue, or is there 
a more fundamental concern?


According to their definition, derivations have an optional identifier. 
To express an alternate for a derivation, we need to be able to 
reference it, by means of an identifier. Hence, it is necessary for it 
to have an identifier in the first place (ex:d).



Luc


> On May 10, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> We are seeking feedback on text regarding bundles (allowing provenance
>> of provenance to be expressed).
>>
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd6-bundle.html
>>
>> It is addressing ISSUES-257, ISSUE-260, ISSUE-88, ISSUE-297.
>> We will respond to these issues individually, shortly.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Luc
>>
>>
>

-- 
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