- From: Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 16:14:01 +0100
- To: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+=hbbfaPT6_Wq2WV1-Aths1Zurj0EgcL4K9JJVjiEp6r8Q5vw@mail.gmail.com>
No objections received, issue is now closed Regards, Tom 2013/3/22 Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be> > As mentioned in the issue, Sam and I are not in favor of adding a new > constraint for this. > > Proposal to resolve this issue: Keep EmptyCollection and Dictionary > unconstrained (Do not add a new constraint on EmptyCollection and > Dictionary), because it would facilitate a way of specifying > EmptyDictionary we should not encourage: > i.e. > entity(d, [prov:type="prov:Dictionary", prov:type="prov:EmptyCollection"]) > instead of > entity(d, [prov:type="prov:EmptyDictionary") > > If any members of the WG have an objection to this, we ask kindly to > inform us by replying to this email. If no objections are received before > Tuesday March 26th, we will assume this resolution is accepted, > > - Tom > > > > 2013/3/7 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> > >> PROV-ISSUE-645 (TomDN): Should we add a new constraint on EmptyCollection >> and Dictionary? [PROV-DICTIONARY] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/645 >> >> Raised by: Tom De Nies >> On product: PROV-DICTIONARY >> >> Originally raised by Khalid, and agreed to discuss before the next >> release. >> >> Khalid's email: >> >Regarding prov:EmptyDictionary, I think there is anew constraint >> >that can be added to state that an entity that is both a dictionary >> >and an empty collection is an empty dictionary. >> >> My response: >> I would be cautious to adding new constraints, especially with PROV-DM >> constructs on the left-hand side. >> Note that we have the reverse, in constraint D12.2. Technically, your >> constraint is correct and doesn't break anything. I guess I just don't see >> a use case where one would want to write: >> entity(d, [prov:type="prov:Dictionary", prov:type="prov:EmptyCollection"]) >> instead of >> entity(d, [prov:type="prov:EmptyDictionary") >> This is, in my view, a way of specifying EmptyDictionary we should not >> encourage. >> >> >> I would like to ask the opinion of the group on this before we the final >> release. >> >> >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2013 15:14:29 UTC