[PROV-AQ] ISSUE-618: Should pingback be described in PROV-AQ?

Re: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/618

"Some reviewers have commented that the provenance ping back description may be 
out-of-place in the PROV-AQ document.

This issue is a place-holder to bring this to a group vote, when the current 
PROV-AQ editing round is done. (One reason for this delay os that Stian has 
proposed a small change to how pingback may work that could make it function 
more like an alternative discovery mechanism."

PROPOSE: to keep Pingback in PROV-AQ as described at 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-prov-aq-20130312/#forward-provenance

...

My thoughts:

There was a legitimate concern that the original Pingback proposal was pushing 
the scope of PROV-AQ beyond "Access and Query", and associated discovery functions.

In my view, the revised proposal (substantially as suggested by Stian) 
substantially reduces this scope extension, as the pingback is now simply a 
provenance discovery mechanism, aimed at provenance which can be created only 
after the original resource is published, and is hence not amenable to the other 
defined mechanisms.

Several working group members have expressed interest in the capability provided 
by this mechanism.  As this document is NOTE, not a REC, I think it is 
reasonable to publish something that we has received significant consideration 
by several WG members, to encourage some commonality in deployment of the 
desired capability.  A future WG in this area may look to any deployment 
experience (or lack of) in deciding whether or not the specifications would 
usefully be progressed on a recommendation track, or equivalent.

#g
--

Received on Monday, 11 March 2013 11:13:27 UTC