- From: Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:58:08 +0100
- To: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CA+=hbbfE_cxCzMZGGejkJ6TiQa5WzmdjXjLA4JLXNEq96M2_mA@mail.gmail.com>
I have commited the changes to the schema and I have synced the document. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/xml/schema/prov-dictionary.xsd http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-prov-dictionary-20130312/#dictionary-xml-schema Issue now pending review Tom 2013/3/25 Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> > Hi Stephan, > Have you committed the new schema? > Thanks, > Luc > > > On 03/14/2013 04:21 PM, Stephan Zednik wrote: > > I updated my local schema and ran the validation tests > in /examples/eg-40-xml-examples-by-term/xml. Xmllint can successfully > parse the schema and all tests in the directory still validate. I noticed > that we don't appear to have any dictionary tests in the examples so my > test really only proved we didn't break the schema ;-) > > I think as a follow-up we should add examples from PROV-DICTIONARY to > /examples/eg-40-xml-examples-by-term/xml. Tom, can you take the lead on > that? > > I also have not run JAXB on the proposed updated schema. I will do this > later tonight and see if the proposed changes cause errors with the JAXB > parser or an unwieldy mapping. > > --Stephan > > On Mar 14, 2013, at 10:04 AM, Tom De Nies <tom.denies@ugent.be> wrote: > > Looks reasonable to me. > > I'm not at work for the rest of this week, but I'll have draft the > proposed changes next week so we can vote on them at the telecon. > > - Tom > > 2013/3/14 Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> > >> >> +1 >> >> >> On 14/03/2013 15:44, Stephan Zednik wrote: >> >>> Do the derivation by insertion and removal support the same set of >>> PROV-defined attributes? >>> >>> Assuming that they support prov:label and prov:type and not the other >>> PROV-defined attributes, I would suggest we update the Insertion and >>> Removal complexTypes in the following way. >>> >>> The current insertion: >>> >>> <!-- Insertion --> >>> <xs:complexType name="Insertion"> >>> <xs:sequence> >>> <xs:element name="newDictionary" type="prov:IDRef"/> >>> <xs:element name="oldDictionary" type="prov:IDRef"/> >>> <xs:element name="keyValuePair" type="prov:KeyValuePair" >>> maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>> </xs:sequence> >>> </xs:complexType> >>> >>> be changed to: >>> >>> <!-- Insertion --> >>> <xs:complexType name="Insertion"> >>> <xs:sequence> >>> <xs:element name="newDictionary" type="prov:IDRef"/> >>> <xs:element name="oldDictionary" type="prov:IDRef"/> >>> <xs:element name="keyValuePair" type="prov:KeyValuePair" >>> maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>> <!-- prov attributes --> >>> <xs:element ref="prov:label" minOccurs="0" >>> maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>> <xs:element ref="prov:type" minOccurs="0" >>> maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>> <xs:any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" >>> minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>> </xs:sequence> >>> <xs:attribute ref="prov:id"/> >>> </xs:complexType> >>> >>> The current removal: >>> >>> <!-- Removal --> >>> <xs:complexType name="Removal"> >>> <xs:sequence> >>> <xs:element name="newDictionary" type="prov:IDRef"/> >>> <xs:element name="oldDictionary" type="prov:IDRef"/> >>> <xs:element name="key" type="xs:anySimpleType" >>> maxOccurs="unbounded" /> >>> </xs:sequence> >>> </xs:complexType> >>> >>> be changed to: >>> >>> <!-- Removal --> >>> <xs:complexType name="Removal"> >>> <xs:sequence> >>> <xs:element name="newDictionary" type="prov:IDRef"/> >>> <xs:element name="oldDictionary" type="prov:IDRef"/> >>> <xs:element name="key" type="xs:anySimpleType" >>> maxOccurs="unbounded" /> >>> <!-- prov attributes --> >>> <xs:element ref="prov:label" minOccurs="0" >>> maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>> <xs:element ref="prov:type" minOccurs="0" >>> maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>> <xs:any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" >>> minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >>> </xs:sequence> >>> <xs:attribute ref="prov:id"/> >>> </xs:complexType> >>> >>> --Stephan >>> >>> On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:18 AM, "Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker"< >>> sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> PROV-ISSUE-650: dictionary insertion, with or without id/attrs? >>>> [PROV-DICTIONARY] >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/650 >>>> >>>> Raised by: Luc Moreau >>>> On product: PROV-DICTIONARY >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> It seems that the prov-n notation for dictionary insertion allows for >>>> id and attributes, but the xml schema does not. Ontology contains a >>>> qualified Insertion. >>>> >>>> So is this a mistake of the schema? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Luc >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Professor Luc Moreau >> Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487<%2B44%2023%208059%204487> >> University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865<%2B44%2023%208059%202865> >> Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk >> United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm >> >> >> >> > > > > -- > 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 > >
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2013 16:58:37 UTC