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

Re: PROV-ISSUE-496: ivan's feedback on prov-n LC [prov-n]

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 18:44:03 -0400
Message-Id: <FAA274AA-8978-46EA-8ED6-FA30FB14A208@w3.org>
Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
To: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Ok. If this is indeed clear and this is the group's decision after discussions, then of course I am fine. 

Ivan

----
Ivan Herman
+31 641044153

(Written on my mobile. Excuses for brevity and frequent misspellings...)



On 16 Oct 2012, at 18:37, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi Ivan
> 
> Response below.
> 
> On 16/10/12 15:49, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> Luc,
>> 
>> I am happy with the other changes, but I still have question on the namespace issue. See below
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 16, 2012, at 07:40 , Luc Moreau wrote:
>> [skip]
>>>> - 3.4.7, Namespace declaration:
>>>> 
>>>>    - minor buglet: in the bulleted item either both lines should begin with capital 'T' or none of the two
>>>>    - I do not understand this sentence:
>>>>    "the scope of a namespace declaration directly occurring in a toplevel
>>>>          bundle is the toplevel bundle itself, except and namedBundle it may contain".
>>>>     I presume what it wants to say is that a namespace declaration in a named bundle has priority over the namespace declaration in the top level bundle and somehow the editing went wrong…
>>> I have fixed the typo and edited the scoping rule. Hopefully, this clarifies this issue.
>> first of all, exclunding -> excluding
> 
> Fixed.
>> 
>> But just to be clear about the intention. The way I understand the current sentence:
>> 
>> [[[
>> The scope of a namespace declaration directly occurring in a document is the document itself, exclunding the bundles it may contain
>> ]]]
>> 
>> is that, in case of
>> 
>> document
>>   prefix a <http:...>
>>   ...
>>   bundle abcde
>>     ... a:something ...
>>   endBundle
>> endDocument
>> 
>> the usage of 'a:something' is illegal. I am a bit surprised by this definition; usually (eg, in the trig-in-preparation) the prefix declarations given on the top are valid for the whole document, but you may have had good reasons for this restrictions that was discussed before I joined the group. Ie, I will not object to that, but just wanted to be sure that we do have the same understanding.
> Your interpretation is correct.
> 
> There was a very *strong* push back by several WG members against any notion of scope related to bundles.  So, we adopted
> this solution that makes bundles in prov-n totally self-contained.
> The downside is that we can't inherit a prefix from a document, instead we have to replicate the prefix declaration.
> The good thing is that bundles are totally independent, and this fact is exploited in prov-constraints.
> 
> Luc.
> 
> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Luc
>>> 
>>>> 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
>>> -- 
>>> 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
>> 
>> ----
>> 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
> 
> -- 
> 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 Tuesday, 16 October 2012 22:45:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:20 UTC