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

Re: prov-dm issues under review

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:42:14 +0200
Message-ID: <8E677D8D-F211-49D5-B420-89FCBE69C2A5@vu.nl>
CC: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
To: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Hi Luc

Yes - I think both clarifications address the points. I'm happy with both responses.

Regards
Paul

On Oct 19, 2012, at 13:23, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> 
> On 10/17/2012 07:23 PM, Paul Groth wrote:
>> Hi Luc,
>> 
>> I'm fine with all proposed resolutions except for two:
>> 
>> For ISSUE-529
>> - Add to "Prov-dm, as a conceptual model, leaves the implementation of
>> these inherited types to concrete serializations." Thus,
>> serializations can support hadMember as a list. This would I believe
>> address the reviewers comment specifically.
> I have added the following:
> 
> As to the question of why doesn't PROV-DM have a list of members as an 
> attribute of Collections, the design of prov-dm makes all associations 
> between PROV entities relations. In effect, this allows us to understand 
> the structure of a provenance graph, just by looking at the relations, 
> without having to process attributes of entities. A given implementation 
> may also to decide to represent collection members as attributes if it 
> finds it convenient.
> 
>> 
>> ISSUE-499
>> - I think the clarification provided is clear but we could do more to
>> address the recommendation that somehow the definitions seem circular.
>> Can we say the words "instant" or immediate in these definitions. We
>> often make appeals to prov-constraints but I believe that PROV-DM
>> should stand on its own.
> 
> We could add the following after the definition of 
> generation/usage/invalidation/start/end in PROV-DM:
> 
> 
> - Given that a generation is the completion of production of an entity, 
> it is instantaneous.
> - Given that an invalidation is the start  of destruction, cessation, or 
> expiry, it is instantaneous.
> - Given that a usage  is  the beginning of utilizing an entity, it is 
> instantaneous.
> - Given that a start is when an activity is deemed to have started, it 
> is instantaneous.
> - Given that an end is when an activity is deemed to have ended, it is 
> instantaneous.
> 
> 
> Would it address your concerns?
> 
> Luc
> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Paul
> 
> -- 
> 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 Friday, 19 October 2012 12:43:05 UTC

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