- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:26:44 +0000
- To: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJCyKRo5+s9tAEasgC2EGqmfrvCcSAzJNA4jR4ztXe1sgtSP-Q@mail.gmail.com>
ok will do. @Graham will you update the paq? Thanks Paul On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>wrote: > yes Paul, no problem, I wouldn't wait till the call, I would tell all > editors now. > > Luc > > > On 02/27/2013 10:16 AM, Paul Groth wrote: > > I have this as part of the agenda item on the call tomorrow. > > I'd like to decide by then. > > @Luc are you ok with the underscore solution? > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > >> Very honestly: I do not have strong opinion here, I can go either way. >> But yes, we should decide soon. >> >> Ivan >> >> On Feb 27, 2013, at 11:02 , Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote: >> >> > Have we come to a conclusion on this? >> > >> > We need to decide to let people go through the staging process. >> > >> > I'm in favor of prov:has_provenance . As this is a purely syntactic >> change from what we already had. >> > >> > cheers >> > Paul >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> >> wrote: >> > I would favour prov:has_provenance over prov:hasprovenance or >> prov:provenance. >> > >> > I have a concern that prov:provenance reads more like a class name than >> a >> > property/relation. Also, can we be sure that, in future, someone won't >> want to >> > define prov:Provenance as a class of some kind? (Because of the case >> > insensitive matching defined by RFC5988, and arguably good practice >> generally, >> > the capitalized form should be off-limits for future use if >> prov:provenance is >> > selected. >> > >> > #g >> > -- >> > >> > >> > On 26/02/2013 10:51, Paul Groth wrote: >> > > That seems to be the best way then. >> > > >> > > so prov:hasprovenance or prov:has_provenance >> > > >> > > ? >> > > >> > > Paul >> > > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: >> > > >> > >> Do you mean the element that is generated into the header of the >> HTML? If >> > >> that is the only place it appears, I think we can change that for the >> > >> published PR document before handing it over to the webmaster. >> > >> >> > >> Ivan >> > >> >> > >> On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:42 , Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> It's in the <link> element we added last week. >> > >>> >> > >>> On 26/02/2013 09:40, Ivan Herman wrote: >> > >>>> Graham, >> > >>>> >> > >>>> I am not sure I understand something. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> I have looked at the prov-o document, and that document does not >> > >> mention the prov:hasProvenance term. Ie, where does this term appear >> in any >> > >> of the four Rec-track documents? More importantly, does it appear, >> if it >> > >> does, in a normative section? >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Ivan >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:30 , Graham Klyne<GK@ninebynine.org> >> wrote: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>> Hi, >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> [I'm keeping this off-list for now, because if Ivan says there's >> > >> nothing we can do at this juncture, I see little point in opening >> the issue >> > >> for wider discussion. I am cc'ing www-archive so there's a record >> of our >> > >> discussion.] >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> This is a bit embarrassing, given an email I wrote just a couple >> of >> > >> days ago. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> I'm working through comments on PROV-AQ, and Stian has raised the >> > >> following: >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> [[ >> > >>>>> 32) According to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988#section-4.2 >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> When extension relation types are compared, they MUST be compared >> as >> > >>>>> strings (after converting to URIs if serialised in a different >> > >>>>> format, such as a Curie [W3C.CR-curie-20090116]) in a case- >> > >>>>> insensitive fashion, character-by-character. Because of this, >> all- >> > >>>>> lowercase URIs SHOULD be used for extension relations. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> Should we not have relation URIs that are all lowercase to avoid >> > >> problems? ie. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> Link:<http://acme.example.org/provenance/super-widget>; >> > >>>>> rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#hasprovenance" >> > >>>>> ]] >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> I had completely missed this in RFC5988, and had forgotten about >> > >> Stian's comment when I replied a couple of days ago. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> If we hadn't just been through the incorporation of provenance >> links >> > >> into the published documents, I'd suggest changing "hasProvenance" to >> > >> "has_provenance" to avoid the problems noted. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> So, what now? I see a few options: >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> (a) keep the same name, and simply note that, when used as a link >> > >> relation, prov:hasProvenance is compared case-insensitively. >> > >>>>> (b) if it's not too late, change the property name >> > >>>>> (c) define a second property that is all lowercase, and declared >> > >> equivalent to the first. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> As far as I can tell, the main consequence of going with option >> (a) is >> > >> that we MUST NOT in future define a different property/relation >> > >> prov:hasprovenance, as under some circumstances covered by RFC5988, >> this >> > >> would be indistinguishable from prov:hasProvenance. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> Given where we now are, my inclination would be to stay with >> things as >> > >> they are, but add a note reserving the all lower-case versions of >> > >> prov:hasProvenance, etc., from future use because of the case >> insensitivity >> > >> comparison requirement. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> #g >> > >>>>> -- >> > >>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> ---- >> > >>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> > >>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> > >>>> mobile: +31-641044153 >> > >>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>> >> > >>> -- >> > >>> 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 >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> ---- >> > >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> > >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> > >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> > >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > -- >> > Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) >> > http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ >> > Assistant Professor >> > - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group | >> > Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science >> > - The Network Institute >> > VU University Amsterdam >> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > -- > Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) > http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ > Assistant Professor > - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group | > Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science > - The Network Institute > VU University Amsterdam > > > -- > 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 > > -- -- Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ Assistant Professor - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group | Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science - The Network Institute VU University Amsterdam
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 10:27:16 UTC