Re: PROV-ISSUE-613 (prov-aq-draft-review): Review paq for release as last call working draft [Accessing and Querying Provenance]

On 16/01/2013 18:53, Miles, Simon wrote:
> Hello Paul, Graham,
>
> Here's my review of the latest PAQ document.
Simon,

Thank you for your comments.   I've accepted most of them.  Details inline below.

>
> In general, it seemed readable and precise.
>
> In the intro bullet list of Section 1, "forward provenance" is mentioned for the first time. It would be good to give brief intuition about what this is, as it may not be obvious to the readers.
I've added a very brief description: "(i.e. provenance about future entities 
that are based upon or influenced by a resource)"

>
> In Section 3, the term "consumer" is defined, but then "requester is used in later paragraphs, including the mechanism bullet list, and then "client" a bit further down. I was not clear if these were the same or related concepts.
I've changed "requester" to "consumer"

>
> Section 3.1 says "Provenance indicated in this way is not guaranteed to be authoritative". Isn't this true of all the access mechanisms, not just the one described in Section 3.1?
Good point.  I've moved this up to section 2, and tweaked the text .

>
> Section 4.1 does not say (as far as I could see) whether the RDF returned from dereferencing a service URI would include any triples for which the subject was not the service, i.e. any other RDF data. If it can, then I don't see it is guaranteed the client could unambiguously extract the information that described the appropriate query service (especially if the RDF describes more than one provenance query service). Shouldn't there be some restriction on what the RDF contains?
I accept some clarification might be in order, but I disagree that the RDF 
should be restricted.  The RDF service description may describe an open-ended 
list of service endpoints whose URIs may be different from the initial service 
URI dereferenced.  If there are also other RDF statements in the graph returned, 
I don't see that's a problem.

I've not made any changes at this time, because there's a more fundamental 
proposal from Stian that I think will go some way ton addressing the clarity and 
discovery issues you raise.  (Stian proposes linking the service document to the 
service mechanism descriptions using RDF properties, so the relation is more 
explicit.  I am minded to accept this proposal.)
>
> The new section, Section 5, seemed fine to me.
>
> Typos:
>   - Section 1.1, Constrained resource definition: "it's" -> "its"
Fixed.
>   - I don't know why the last sentence of Section 1.3 or the Dereferences column for Pingback-URI are in parentheses.
Re-worked.
>   - First sentence of last paragraph of Section 2, there seems to be too much italics.
The italics were a direct quotation from PROV-DM.  I've added quotation marks to 
make this clearer.
>   - Section 4, paragraph 3, final sentence has too many "not described here"s.
Redundant final clause removed.

Many thanks for your helpful comments.

#g
--

> Review questions:
>   - Can this be released as a last call working draft? YES
>   - Is the name provenance access and query appropriate for the document? YES
>   - If not, where are the blocking issues? NONE
>   - If yes, are there other issues to work on? NO
>
> thanks,
> Simon
>
> Dr Simon Miles
> Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics
> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
>
> Transparent Provenance Derivation for User Decisions:
> http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1400/
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker [sysbot+tracker@w3.org]
> Sent: 10 January 2013 14:56
> To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
> Subject: PROV-ISSUE-613 (prov-aq-draft-review): Review paq for release as last call working draft [Accessing and Querying Provenance]
>
> PROV-ISSUE-613 (prov-aq-draft-review): Review paq for release as last call working draft [Accessing and Querying Provenance]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/613
>
> Raised by: Paul Groth
> On product: Accessing and Querying Provenance
>
> Reviewing
>
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/b3f397c7b15c/paq/prov-aq.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 18:58:39 UTC