- From: Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 01:35:07 -0700
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Notes on a changeset to PROV-XML note. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/c2aad24cd958 The glossary reference issue has not been resolved (see below). On Feb 26, 2013, at 4:40 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > > Some further feedback: > - prov family of documents is a bit out of date with the rec documents. In particular, prov-sem missing. updated. > - links to be updated to release date: 20130312 I only found one link that was to the old release date (in the abstract text), it has been updated. > - all references should be non normative since this is going to be a note I am not sure what you mean here. Could you provide an example? Regarding the glossary references: I updated my references to the glossary to reflect the examples from the current DM, but the glossary definitions are still not showing up. Luc, can you take a look at the glossary references & related javascript and see if you can determine why the glossary references still do not work? I will not have much time to look into this until early next week. --Stephan > > Luc > > On 26/02/2013 11:28, Luc Moreau wrote: >> >> Hi Stephan, Curt, Hook, >> >> It's a good document. Ideally, there are a few things I would like to see >> fixed before the next release, and if not by then, before final >> release. I recommend release as a next WD. >> >> Key issues: >> - It's not clear that examples are schema valid. Many ids do not have >> a prefix, but no default namespace seems to be defined. >> Can we check all examples against the latest schema? >> >> - I would suggest adding a section 4 to define prov:Document (like >> there was similar section in prov-n), since it doesn't seem to be >> defined in the main text. >> >> - I suggest updating the mime type application with the feedback >> received from the ietf mailing list, and submitting the revised >> version to the ietf mailing list for final check. >> >> Note that I haven't been able to check the schema compiles naturally >> with JAXB, but you gave us assurance it was the case. >> >> Cheers, >> Luc >> >> Detailed feedback: >> >> Abstract: third sentence does not parse >> >> Intro. Text copied verbatim from dm. It should be clear for the reader >> that this design comes from DM. Maybe also add some links to DM (for >> references and components). >> >> 2.1 corresponding to terms defined in the PROV-DM. >> >> Extend PROV-DM to the PROV data model >> >> 2.2 salami slice citation missing >> >> 2.2. It's use ... Its >> >> 2.3 the PROV-N. ... PROV-N >> >> 2.3. As in PROV-N, the attributes can >> ... "attributes" >> Generally, do we want to go through the document and check whether this "attribute" or attribute >> I would suggest that a <dfn>prov-n attribute</dfn> is introduced, and <a>attribute</a> to refer to it. >> >> 2.3 Wherever an "id" is referenced from a later concept >> Later?? >> >> 2.4 using A the prov:type PROV WITH and ... delete 'a', with??? >> >> This element can be use. ->. Used >> >> The following examples shows type. Which example? use number. >> >> from the default element type. . Not sure what is meant here >> >> 2.6 with [PROV-N] record names >> Prov-n expression names >> >> section 3 >> "The element prov:wasStartedBy is used to reference a prov:Start from within a prov:Document or prov:BundleConstructor." >> The xml names do not appear in same font/color. I wonder whether some could be links? >> >> 3.2 HasPrimarySource. ... HadPrimarySource >> >> example 23. Line-management example has no prefix, but no default prefix defined. Generally hav we checked all examples are schema valid. >> I now realise prov:ref="a" suffers from the same problem. This occurs in several xamples. >> >> 3.4.2 The element prov:bundleContent is used to reference a set of nested provenance statements from within a prov:Document. >> I don't think the term reference here is right. ... What about >> " prov:bundleContent is used tho package up a set of prov statements and give them an identity. >> >> 3.7.1. "The identifier attribute is used to identify instances of PROV types or relations." >> >> I don't think the phrasing is right. We agreed the identifiers identify entities, or activities, etc. >> The sentence seems to indicate that the Id is used to identify the record. >> >> More generally, I am becoming unsure that the distinction prov:ref / prov:id is right. I wonder whether we shouldn't go for prov:ref everywhere. The only exception is bundleconstuctor which rely identifies a bundle and therefore needs prov:Id >> >> >> Is there a distinction between >> <prov:location xsi:type="xsd:string">(5,5)</prov:location> >> And >> <prov:location>(5,5)</prov:location> >> >> Section 3.7.3.x >> >> The element prov:value is used to represent a PROV attribute. >> Which attribute? Doing what? Same for all the others. >> I guess it's "attribute". >> >> > > -- > 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 Thursday, 28 February 2013 08:35:55 UTC