- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 13:25:07 +0200
- To: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
I believe that the consensus is to rename it to PrimarySource. hasPrimarySource Is that correct, Jim, Tim. Thanks Paul On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi Paul, Tim, Jim, all, > > What's the consensus on this? What definition and name do you want to > adopt for this > relation? > > Luc > > On 06/05/2012 08:35 PM, Paul Groth wrote: >> Yeah, this is what I was thinking as well. >> >> Paul >> >> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Jim McCusker<mccusj@rpi.edu> wrote: >> >>> hadPrimarySource is much clearer. Anyone who has paid attention in history >>> class (at least in the US) should be familiar with the idea of primary >>> sources, so I think it's probably the most useful term. >>> >>> Jim >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Paul Groth<p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi TIm, >>>> >>>> I think i'm bending your way. If other's think primary source is more >>>> intelligible then I'm happy to change this. >>>> I think Luc also finally "got' this relation when I pointed him to the >>>> wiki page so maybe that says something as well. >>>> >>>> cheers >>>> Paul >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Timothy Lebo<lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Paul Groth wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> This is the same intent as the google definition of original source in >>>>>> my reading of their post. I would consider primary source but think >>>>>> original source has some history of usage on the web already. >>>>>> >>>>> Where on the web is "original source" used? >>>>> Blogging? >>>>> >>>>> Anywhere else? >>>>> I'm not a blogger, and I haven't seen "original source". >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> cheers >>>>>> Paul >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Timothy Lebo<lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Paul Groth wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yeah, orginalsource had the meaning >>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Oh, did we shift from the meaning taken from that Google Blog about >>>>>>> journalism ? >>>>>>> (which, I can't find in any public draft, so I guess "yes"…) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I like the description at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source >>>>>>> __much__ better, >>>>>>> I had no idea that that was the intent of hadOriginalSource. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since wikipedia choose the name "primary", perhaps we should too. >>>>>>> I would be in favor of renaming: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> hadOriginalSource -> hadPrimarySource >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Now that I understand the concept, I'd rather this than the >>>>>>> "originatedFrom", which is drastically different. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To me a "big change" now is changing stuff that has been in the spec >>>>>>>> in a number of drafts. I won't really argue hard but I want to be >>>>>>>> convinced that this is worth it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's reasonable. But perhaps it indicates that the bigger problems >>>>>>> are out of the way now :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Tim >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Timothy Lebo<lebot@rpi.edu> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:54 AM, Paul Groth wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Tim, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I don't think hadOriginalSource and originatedFrom convey the same >>>>>>>>>> meaning. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think that they are pretty close in meaning, and one follows the >>>>>>>>> naming style more appropriately. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am also a bit concerned about doing these big renames of >>>>>>>>>> things. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> How do you measure "big"? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -Tim >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> cheers >>>>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue >>>>>>>>>> Tracker >>>>>>>>>> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> PROV-ISSUE-395: Rename hadOriginalSource to "originatedFrom"? >>>>>>>>>>> [prov-dm] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/395 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Raised by: Timothy Lebo >>>>>>>>>>> On product: prov-dm >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> DM editors, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Could hadOriginalSource be renamed to "originatedFrom" ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think it follows the "wasDerivedFrom" naming a little more >>>>>>>>>>> closely, and avoids an exception to PROV-O's "has" naming convention. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Then, perhaps the Involvement "Source" could be renamed "Origin"? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> And qualifiedSource would become qualifiedOrigin. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think that this naming is a little more natural. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> (yes, this is phrased in terms of PROV-O, but an issue on DM; >>>>>>>>>>> probably best product would be mapping prov-dm<-> prov-o...) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> VU University Amsterdam >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> VU University Amsterdam >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> VU University Amsterdam >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> -- >>>> 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 >>>> VU University Amsterdam >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jim McCusker >>> Programmer Analyst >>> Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics >>> Yale School of Medicine >>> james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330 >>> http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu >>> >>> PhD Student >>> Tetherless World Constellation >>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute >>> mccusj@cs.rpi.edu >>> http://tw.rpi.edu >>> >> >> >> > > -- > 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 VU University Amsterdam
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 11:25:46 UTC