W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > April 2013

comments on prov-xml

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:56:52 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJCyKRo8hYF4MZotNqbgLOX639FU=UD8JL9GFyjMVW2rB+sTOA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
Cc: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Stephan, prov-xml editors

I'm happy for prov-xml to be released as a final note. It's a
straightforward and clear presentation.

My Comments:


#Section 1

* "This specification goal" --> "This specification's goal"
* italize - "This specification goal is to provide a succinct definition of
the XML form of PROV-DM"

# Section 1.1

* add prefix prov: as a convention
* what is OXM?

# Section 2.3

* A sudden mention of PROV-N. Can we get a simple two sentence intro to
PROV-N.
* Maybe lead with the general xml pattern that is followed and then justify
by analogy to PROV-N
* "Stating all type information using the PROV type attribute assists in
interoperability with non-PROV-XML encoding of PROV." - Why?


# Section 3

* I like table 1
* Why no link back to dm definitions?
* What's the provenance of the examples? just out of curiosity

# Appendix

* do we want the schemas here? we don't do this with the ontology



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
- Web & Media Group | Department of Computer Science
- The Network Institute
VU University Amsterdam
Received on Thursday, 11 April 2013 14:57:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:35 UTC