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

Re: PROV-XML element ordering

From: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 12:08:37 -0700
Cc: "Luc Moreau" <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C609FF8F-4E97-4A4E-965B-5C4F3FC4408B@rpi.edu>
To: Curt Tilmes <Curt.Tilmes@nasa.gov>
After having played around with JAB and gaining a better understanding of the problem I am more amenable to the idea of requiring element ordering for properties.

I am still not sold on the idea of element ordering in documentElements and without that the generated class methods for Bundle will be a 'bag of hurt'.

An alternate idea is a to have a section in the FAQ dedicated to providing ORM implementation-specific tips on how to generate 'nice' mappings.

The plugin Curt has mentioned could be mentioned in a FAQ entry and we could provide an example of how to use external hints to JAXB.  The FAQ could also contain links to a modified schema that uses ordered elements and is only intended to be used as a source for ORM mappings, but not as a schema to validate against.

I think I like the second option best as it allows us to respond to ORM-mapping issues after the WG activity has completed and is a natural way to talk about implementation specific ORM issues.


On Feb 5, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Curt Tilmes <Curt.Tilmes@nasa.gov> wrote:

> Luc,
> I haven't tested this yet, but is it possible that the jaxb
> "Simplify" plugin could address this problem with jaxb?
> http://confluence.highsource.org/display/J2B/Simplify+Plugin
> It seems (again, untested), that you could use it and specify
> some application hints for jaxb ("simplify:as-element-property")
> for the attributes that would instruct jaxb to model
> each attribute family (type, location, label, etc.) with
> its own list rather than bundling them together as it
> does by default with choices.
> Curt
> On 02/05/2013 01:37 AM, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> Hi Curt,
>> Does the schema  now impose an order on prov "attributes"?
>> Without order, I have failed to define an object mapping (with jaxb)
> that is useful from an OO perspective. Likewise, i have not managed to
> define a meaningful ORM mapping. Now, this is my experience with these
> tools, maybe somebody has succeeded.
>> In summary, The problem I encountered is as follows. If there is a
> choice (instead of sequence) between say, prov:type, prov:location,
> prov:label, all these elements are mapped to a single java method or a
> single sql column. This results in non natural code or SQL queries.
>> Because of this, my preference is to keep these in a sequence. It does
> not at all reduce expressivity, I think.
>> Professor Luc Moreau
>> Electronics and Computer Science
>> University of Southampton
>> Southampton SO17 1BJ
>> United Kingdom
>> On 5 Feb 2013, at 01:17, "Curt Tilmes" <Curt.Tilmes@nasa.gov> wrote:
>>> Last week, we also briefly mentioned the PROV-XML element
>>> ordering issue, described here:
>>> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/572
>>> Are there strong opinions about changing anything (either
>>> arguments, or attributes or anything else from the way it
>>> is now?
>>> Tracker, this is ISSUE-572.
>>> Curt
> -- 
> Curt Tilmes, Ph.D.
> U.S. Global Change Research Program
> 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 250
> Washington, D.C. 20006, USA
> +1 202-419-3479 (office)
> +1 443-987-6228 (cell)
> globalchange.gov
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2013 19:09:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:30 UTC