- From: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:07:53 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|c20ab1c95c69d712462d8fd79e5bce89o8PB7s08l.moreau|ecs.soton.ac.uk|5062D3F9>
Dear all, I have drafted a response to ISSUE-509 on the wiki http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-509_.28AttributesInUML.29 Feedback appreciated, Regards, Luc ISSUE-509 (AttributesInUML) * Original email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0099.html * Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/509 * Group Response o First, let us note the non normative nature of the UML diagrams. They are here to inform readers, and convey the intuition of the data model o The UML actually represent all the information present in relations such as WasStartedBy. + PROV Id and PROV attributes are explicitly listed as UML attributes in the association class + The started activity and the trigger entity are source and destination of the association edge + The starter activity is present with the starter edge + Time is also present though the time edge o With UML diagrams, we can take a full object oriented view or a more relational view of the data model. The former lists all attributes, whereas the latter highlights the relations. We opted for the latter approach. o Hence, what the UML diagram does not explicit represent is the actual names of all attributes of a relation. That is covered by the normative text. o It is correct that Time is a primitive datatype, and marked as such. Given the important of time and events in the model, it is considered pedagogical to keep it in Figure 5. We note that Figure 1, the much simplified version, doesn't show it. o Finally, it's correct that we use names such as Start, but the UML diagram contains relation label WasStartedBy. This has now been fixed for all introductory paragraphs. * References: o UML informative nature: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0272.html * Implemented changes: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/diff/817b3b917afe/model/prov-dm.html * Original author's acknowledgement: [edit <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/index.php?title=ResponsesToPublicComments&action=edit§ion=34>] On 10/09/2012 09:39, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-509: Data Model Figure 5 [prov-dm] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/509 > > Raised by: Luc Moreau > On product: prov-dm > > > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Figure_5 > > ISSUE-463 > > > The figure is a little cluttered. Since Time is a primitive datatype and not an object, it could be removed for clarity. Other datatypes are not shown. > > The headers of the supporting text in section 5.1 are different than the labels in the figure, so the reader must use table 5 as a cross reference when going between them. Some translations are straightforward, but for readers that are new to PROV it is not obvious that wasInformedBy means Communication (for example). > > When modeling complex relationships that have mandatory and optional attributes, class associations are a good approach to use. The current version of the spec does not fully model the relationships, however. Each of the gray classes in figure 5 could be modeled as a complete class that follows the requirements of the relationship. For example, the class wasGeneratedBy currently shows only two attributes, although the spec for Generation lists five (four of which are optional, and one of which can be zero to many). All of this information can be represented very concisely in the diagram, which would make it easier for a reader to get a complete view of the spec graphically. > > > > -- 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 Wednesday, 26 September 2012 10:08:19 UTC