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

Update on implementations of prov

From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:01:38 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJCyKRr3dp0fHz2bQOJSyYpE=aC=7m2j_qi-yAVq2Kp6pPdYow@mail.gmail.com>
To: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi All,

I've gone through the implementation surveys and seen where we were with
respect to our CR exit criteria.

- We have implementations reported from 8 different organizations.

- When reading the implementation report it's important to recognize that
southampton has reported 7 different implementations.

- For PROV-O we have met the first part of the exit criteria that all
constructs are supported by at least two independent implementations
(ProvToolbox, PROVoKing)

- For PROV-O we still need one pair of implementations to exchange
provenance information for all constructs.

- For PROV-N we only have two organizations that report supporting PROV-N
(Southampton, and WebLab-PROV). However, weblab prov does not support many
constructs and I'm not clear if WebLab does indeed support prov-n .

- For PROV-Constraints, we only have one implementation reported that
passes all tests.

We'll discuss how to address the gaps today on the call.

Received on Thursday, 17 January 2013 14:02:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:27 UTC