Difference between revisions of "MeetingProvCRExitCriteria"

From Provenance WG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Introduction)
(2. PROV-N)
 
Line 20: Line 20:
 
2b. For each feature, one interoperability pair will have been demonstrated to exist.
 
2b. For each feature, one interoperability pair will have been demonstrated to exist.
 
* The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes) all PROV-N terms generated by the Provenance Server and the PROV-Python library (University of Southampton, Python code base)
 
* The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes) all PROV-N terms generated by the Provenance Server and the PROV-Python library (University of Southampton, Python code base)
* The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes)  some PROV-N terms generated by APROVeD (Ghent University)
+
* The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes)  the subset of PROV-N terms generated by APROVeD (Ghent University)
 
* The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes)  all PROV-N terms from the examples in the PROV-DM document (Provenance Working Group)
 
* The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes)  all PROV-N terms from the examples in the PROV-DM document (Provenance Working Group)
  

Latest revision as of 10:30, 19 February 2013

Introduction

Here we enumerate how the exit criteria defined by the working group were met based on the implementation report.


1. PROV-O

1a. Each feature of PROV-O is demonstrated to be supported by at least two independent implementations.

  • Prov Toolbox (University of Southampton) and PROVoKing (King's College London) support all features.
  • A total of 40 implementations support some set of PROV-O features.

1b. For each feature, one interoperability pair will have been demonstrated to exist.

  • The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (Consumes) all PROV-O terms generated by PROVoKing (King's College London)
  • The prov-check (VU University of Amsterdam) validates all PROV-O terms converted by the ProvToolbox (University of Southampton)

2. PROV-N

2a. Each feature of PROV-N is demonstrated to be supported by at least two independent implementations.

  • The PROV-Python library (University of Southampton) and PROV-DM document (Provenance Working Group) support all constructs
  • A total of 7 implementations support some set of PROV-N features.

2b. For each feature, one interoperability pair will have been demonstrated to exist.

  • The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes) all PROV-N terms generated by the Provenance Server and the PROV-Python library (University of Southampton, Python code base)
  • The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes) the subset of PROV-N terms generated by APROVeD (Ghent University)
  • The ProvValidator (University of Southampton) validates (consumes) all PROV-N terms from the examples in the PROV-DM document (Provenance Working Group)

3. PROV-DM

PROV-O and PROV-N have satisfied their exit criteria

  • Met because PROV CR Exit Criteria 1.a, 1.b, 2.a, 2.b were all met

4. PROV-Constraints

For each of the test cases defined by the working group, at least two independent implementations pass the tests and claim to conform to the document.

  • ProvValidator (University of Southampton), prov-check (VU University Amsterdam) and checker.pl (University of Edinburgh) pass all test and claim conformance.