--- a/model/ProvenanceModel.html Thu Nov 24 22:41:09 2011 +0000
+++ b/model/ProvenanceModel.html Thu Nov 24 23:10:38 2011 +0000
@@ -525,7 +525,7 @@
</section>
<section id="prov-dm-overview">
-<h2>PROV-DM Overview </h2>
+<h2>PROV-DM: An Overview </h2>
<div class="note"> Figure and text in this section needs to be adapted to the new relations between activity and agent. The term "characterizing attribute" needs also to be removed from the figure.
</div>
@@ -753,8 +753,14 @@
<section>
<h3>Graphical Illustration</h3>
-Provenance assertions can be illustrated as a graph.
-Details about the graphical illustration can be found in <a href="#illustration-conventions">appendix</a>.
+
+<p>
+Provenance assertions can be <em>illustrated</em> graphically. The illustration is not intended to represent all the details of the model, but it is intended to show the essence of a set of provenance assertions. Therefore, it cannot be seen as an alternate notation for expressing provenance.</p>
+
+<p>The graphical illustration takes the form of a graph. Entities, activities and agents are represented as nodes, with oval, rectangular, and half-hexagonal shapes, respectively. Usage, Generation, Derivation, Complementarity are represented as directed edges.</p>
+
+<p>Entities are layed out according to the ordering of their generation event. We endeavor to show time progressing from left to right (or from top to bottom). This means that edges for Use, Generation and Derivation typically point from right to left (or from bottom to top).</p>
+
<img src="example-graphical.png" alt="example"/>
</br>
@@ -767,9 +773,9 @@
<section id="data-model-concepts">
-<h2>PROV-DM: The Provenance Data Model</h2>
-
-<p>This section contains the normative specification of PROV-DM, the PROV data model.</p>
+<h2>PROV-DM Core</h2>
+
+<p>This section contains the normative specification of PROV-DM core, the core of the PROV data model.</p>
<section id="PROV-DM-record">
@@ -2385,18 +2391,21 @@
<section id="common-relations">
-<h2>Common Relations</h2>
-
-<div class='issue'>There are a number of commonly used provenance relations in particular for the web that are not in the model. For practical use and uptake, it would be good to have definitions of these in the provenance model. These concepts should be defined in terms of the already existing "core" concepts. This is <a href="http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/44">ISSUE-44</a>.</div>
+<h2>PROV-DM Common Relations</h2>
+
+<p>This section contains the normative specification of common relations of PROV-DM.</p>
+
+
+<div class='issue'>We have defined a set of common relation, in response to <a href="http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/44">ISSUE-44</a>. Is this set complete?</div>
<div class='note'>The types of these relations need to be made explicit.</div>
-The following figure summarizes the additional relations described in subsections 6.2 onwards.<p/>
+<p>The following figure summarizes the additional relations described in subsections 6.2 onwards.</p>
<img src="sec6-summary.png" alt="common relations"/>
-<p/>
+
<section id="record-Collection">
<h3>Collections</h3>
@@ -2470,8 +2479,10 @@
</p>
-<pre class="example">
-Consider the following assertions:
+<div class="anexample">
+<p>Consider the following assertions:</p>
+<pre class="codeexample">
+
<span class="name">wasAddedTo_Coll(c2,c1)</span>
<span class="name">wasAddedTo_Key(c2,k1)</span>
@@ -2483,7 +2494,6 @@
<span class="name">wasRemovedFrom_Coll(c4,c3)</span>
<span class="name">wasRemovedFrom_Key(c4,k1)</span>
-
</pre>
<p>The corresponding graphical representation is shown below.</p>
@@ -2496,7 +2506,7 @@
<li><span class="name">c3</span> is known to contain pairs <span class="name">(k1,e1)</span> and <span class="name">(k2,e2)</span>.
<li><span class="name">c4</span> is known <em>not</em> to contain pair <span class="name">(k1,e1)</span> and to contain pair <span class="name">(k2,e2)</span>.
</ul>
-
+</div>
</section>
@@ -3017,29 +3027,6 @@
</section>
-<section class="appendix">
-<h2>Illustration Conventions</h2>
-
-<p> In this section, we summarize the conventions adopted for the graphical illustration </p>
-
-<div class='note'>Should we formalize the graphical illustration. Should they become normative?</div>
-
-<ul>
-<li>The graphical illustration aims to <em>illustrate</em> the provenance model. It is not intended to represent all the details of the model, and therefore, cannot be seen as a alternate notation for expressing provenance.</li>
-
-<li>The graphical illustration is a graph. </li>
-
-<li>Entities, activities and agents are represented as nodes, with oval, rectangular, and half-hexagonal shapes, respectively. </li>
-
-<li>Use, Generation, Derivation, IVPof are represented as directed edges.</li>
-
-<li>entities are layed out according to temporal order (the temporal event at which they are generated). Time SHOULD progress from left to right or from top to bottom. This means that edges for Use, Generation and Derivation typically point from right to left or from bottom to top.</li>
-
-</ul>
-
-
-</section>
-
<!--
<li>For use, generation, and derivation event, the first argument is the 'effect' (i.e. most recent item) and the second argument is the 'cause' (i.e. least recent item). This order is compatible with the temporal layout of the graphical notation.
@@ -3049,6 +3036,8 @@
<section class="appendix">
<h2>Changes Since Previous Version</h2>
<ul>
+<li>11/24/11: Added figure of Common Relations in Section 6. </li>
+<li>11/24/11: Updated text preceding graphical illustration, removed appendix A. </li>
<li>11/24/11: Fix on traceability record. </li>
<li>11/24/11: Revisited Derivation record, with a single name for derivation. </li>
<li>11/23/11: Defined attribute, identifier, and namespace declaration. </li>