- From: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:06:17 +0000
- To: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On 21/11/2012 12:58, Luc Moreau wrote:> > Hi all, > > Given that our CR-track documents should be frozen by Monday, it would > be useful to have a few pairs of eyes checking the preliminary staged > versions of the specs. I'm skimming PROV-DM: Intro: do we drop the "editors latest draft" link in the document header for an actual published document? Section 1.4 (namespaces/prefixes): is this really non-normative? I'd have thought the information here is needed to properly interpret some of the normative material. Should section 4.2 have a "non-normative" annotation? 4.3? (section 4.1 does). On reflection, I'd suggest dropping the annotation from 4.1 as there's already one for section 4. Section 5.6: if I'm reading the diagram notation correctly, this indicates that EmptyCollection is a subtype of Collection. (That would imply it can have HadMember relations with other Entities.) Normally, I would expect it to be an *instance* of Collection. In the usage here, I'd expect it to be a related type, but not a subtype. I didn't follow the discussions of containers, so I don't know what is the motivation for including an EmptyCollection type. Section 7: why bullet points? I'd suggest dropping these and just having 3 paragraphs. Appendix A. In it's current form, the cross reference links to PROV-N are not working. Same for PROV-O. This may be an artifact of the staging, but I think this should be checked carefully as the document moves to publication. Appendix B: Should this (change-log) remain for the CR publication? References: it seems strange to me that we have a normative reference to RFC3987, but none to RFC3986. PROV-OVERVIEW link broken (probably a staging artifact) #g -- On 21/11/2012 12:58, Luc Moreau wrote: > > Hi all, > > Given that our CR-track documents should be frozen by Monday, it would > be useful to have a few pairs of eyes checking the preliminary staged > versions of the specs. > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/releases/CR-prov-dm-20121211/Overview.html > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/releases/CR-prov-n-20121211/Overview.html > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/releases/CR-prov-constraints-20121211/Overview.html > > > Known issues: > - text about CR exit criteria, implementation report, etc needs to be added to > intro. > - documents use dated URL where they will be published, so dangling links. > > Can you let us know if you can spare a few minutes glancing at the documents, > providing > any feedback on potential bugs and/or typos. > > Luc > > PS. I am not aware that prov-o is ready yet > >
Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 17:12:28 UTC