Re: PROV-DICTIONARY internal review for first public working draft (ISSUE-614)

Tom, Sam:

Here's my review of PROV-Dictionary. Sorry for the delay.

- Is the notation of Dictionary concepts clear & acceptable for you?
Yes

- Are the constraints acceptable, or are they too loose/too strict?
-- In particular, can the constraint "IF derivedByRemovalFrom(d2, d1,
{"k1"}) THEN hadDictionaryMember(d1, e1, "k1") " be dropped, or do you
strongly support it?

It can be dropped and I'm fine with the rest of the constraints.

- Is the name PROV-DICTIONARY appropriate for the document?
Yes.

- Can this be released as a first public working draft?
Yes, as long as the abstract is updated (see below)

Some brief comments:

- The abstract needs to be expanded. Please say what the document is about.
Suggestion: "This document describes extensions to PROV to facilitate the
modelling of provenance for dictionary data structures"

- I don't understand this sentence: "The specification of such specialized
structures in terms of key-value pairs is out of the scope of this
document.", you just got through talking about maps… it seems out of place
or not complete

- If possible, I would like to see a small example of the provenance of a
dictionary