HOME
ABOUT
- RESULTS
- differences
- BENEFITS
- HISTORY
- TEAM
- LOCATION
- FACILITIES
- BANKING
- MEMBERSHIPS
- APPROVALS
- LICENCES
- SUPPLIERS
- SPONSORSHIPS
- MEDIA
- PRIVACY
AUCTIONS
SHIPPING
FEES
- TS REWARDS
TOOLS
guides
FAQ
CONTACT
- CONNECT

VEHICLES
BRAND
- JAPANESE CARS
  - DAIHATSU
  - EUNOS
  - FORD
  - HONDA
  - ISUZU
  - LEXUS
  - MAZDA
  - MITSUBISHI
  - MITSUOKA
  - NISSAN
  - SUBARU
  - SUZUKI
  - TOYOTA
- GERMAN CARS
- AMERICAN CARS
- BRITISH CARS
- ITALIAN CARS
- FRENCH CARS
- SWEDISH CARS
- KOREAN CARS
TYPE
- mobility
- VENDING
- instruction
- TAXIS
- AMBULANCES
- FIRE ENGINES
- HEARSES
- LIMOUSINES
- COMMERCIAL
CLASS
FUEL
TRUCKS
minitrucks
- DAIHATSU
- HONDA
- MAZDA
- MITSUBISHI
- NISSAN
- SUBARU
- SUZUKI
- DUMP
- CRANE
- CAMPER
- REFRIGERATED
- 4WD
- NEW
BUSES
MOTORHOMES
- YAHOO!
- RAKUTEN
- DEALER

PARTS
- FREE REPORT
- PARTS CONTAINERS
- PARTS SYSTEMS
- PARTS PROTECTION
- BODY SHELLS
- DISMANTLING
- ONLINE PARTS
- NEW PARTS
- INTERIOR PARTS
- EXTERIOR PARTS
  - BONNETS
  - BUMPERS
  - GRILLES
  - FENDERS
  - DOORS
  - TRUNKS
  - SPOILERS
  - LIGHTS
  - EMBLEMS
  - CAMERAS
- ENGINES
- TRANSMISSIONS
- WHEELS & TYRES
  - WHEELS
  - TYRES
CUTS
PERFORMANCE PARTS
TRUCK PARTS
MOTORBIKE PARTS
- MOTORBIKE ENGINES
- MOTORBIKE ACCESSORIES

MOTORBIKES
MARINE
FORKLIFTS
MACHINERY
AGRICULTURAL
OTHER
COUNTRY
- AUSTRALIA
- CANADA
- KENYA
- MYANMAR
- NEW ZEALAND
- PAKISTAN
- TANZANIA
- UNITED STATES

CARVIEW

MOTORHOMES

Select Language

HTTP/2 200 date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 05:06:48 GMT content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 content-location: Overview.html last-modified: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 10:46:50 GMT cache-control: public, max-age=86400 vary: Accept-Encoding,Origin link: ;rel="canonical", ;rel="timegate" access-control-allow-origin: * x-backend: www-mirrors x-request-id: 95f6bb8a89d64e3d strict-transport-security: max-age=15552000; includeSubdomains; preload content-security-policy: frame-ancestors 'self' https://cms.w3.org/ https://cms-dev.w3.org/; upgrade-insecure-requests cf-cache-status: BYPASS set-cookie: __cf_bm=0YyNZONrCz1l8l3aVb0FzzRiinrPlzu8.mPm6Kay3qQ-1752556008-1.0.1.1-4aAN7GtD_jnC3zRYdye30BXQD2JTI4KAXGNExuEGOsz4FvijB3KXsaCL7terSqgqCoaX6Nu72ZZrlc8n7pIlZLYH.7nPTsMax.6JbKcEr3o; path=/; expires=Tue, 15-Jul-25 05:36:48 GMT; domain=.w3.org; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None server: cloudflare cf-ray: 95f6bb8a89d64e3d-BLR content-encoding: gzip alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400 PROV Implementation Report

PROV Implementation Report

W3C Working Group Note 30 April 2013

This version:: https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-implementations-20130430/
Latest published version:: https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-implementations/
Previous version:: https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-prov-implementations-20130312/
Editors:: Trung Dong Huynh, University of Southampton; Paul Groth, VU University Amsterdam; Stephan Zednik, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Abstract

This document reports on implementations and usage of the four normative specifications ([PROV-DM], [PROV-N], [PROV-O], [PROV-CONSTRAINTS]) of the PROV Family of Documents [PROV-OVERVIEW]. In particular, it's aim is to demonstrate that the features defined in PROV are implementable and interoperable. Features are defined as: the constructs specified in [PROV-DM] and their realisation in OWL (see [PROV-O]) and in the [PROV-N] syntax; the constraints defined within [PROV-CONSTRAINTS]. Interoperability is defined through both the interchange of provenance information and the coverage of test cases.

Status of This Document

This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at https://www.w3.org/TR/.

During the lifetime of the Provenance Working Group, implementation experience of the PROV specifications was reported. This document summarises those experiences. The version at https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-prov-implementations-20130312/ is the version used for purposes of transition to proposed recommendation. For comments, please send a mail to public-prov-comments@w3.org [archive].

This document was published by the Provenance Working Group as a Working Group Note. If you wish to make comments regarding this document, please send them to public-prov-comments@w3.org (subscribe, archives). All comments are welcome.

Publication as a Working Group Note does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.

This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy. W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.

1. Introduction
- 1.1 Meeting the Exit Criteria
2. List of Implementations
3. Feature Coverage
4. Implementations Exchanging Provenance
A. Acknowledgements
B. References
- B.1 Informative references

1. Introduction

The goal of PROV is to enable interoperable interchange of provenance on the Web. We take two approaches to documenting the implementation and interoperability of PROV.

For the data model [PROV-DM] and the two working group defined serializations, we document the existence of multiple implementations that support each of the constructs within the data model and that there exists at least two implementations that are reported to exchange these constructs.
We document that the PROV-Constraints specification is implementable by documenting the existence of at least two implementations that report to support all the defined constraints. To evaluate the coverage of implementations, the PROV-Constraints Test Cases are used as a point of reference. There are 280 test cases in total, which map to the the constraints defined by the document.

PROV is useful not only for applications/programs but also for exposing provenance within datasets and as a foundation for other vocabularies. We also document that usage as well.

Implementation evidence was gathered using four surveys.

Implementations in software
Usage in datasets or the web
Extensions of the PROV vocabulary
Implementations of PROV-Constraints

This report summarizes the results of these surveys.

1.1 Meeting the Exit Criteria

At the start of the Candidate Recommendation phase, the Working Group defined a series of exit criteria. These exit criteria can be summarized as for each feature defined by PROV there are at least two implementations that support the feature and that there exists one interoperability pair that can exchange that feature. Section 3.1 shows that three implementations both produce and consume all constructs defined in PROV-DM. PROV-O is implemented by over 40 implementations and PROV-N is implemented by 12 implementations.

In terms of implementation pairs, Section 4 enumerates which pairs of implementations report exchanging provenance. Here, we meet the exit criteria in that each feature is exchanged by at least two implementations.

Finally, three validators have implemented all of the constraints defined in PROV-Constraints passing the requisite test cases, thus, passing the exit criteria. The working group recognizes that implementing the PROV-Constraints document requires substantial effort. It is nice to see that three radically different approaches were chosen to implement this specification: SPARQL, Java, Prolog, which speaks to the implementability of this specification.

For a systematic enumeration of how the exit criteria were met, please see https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/MeetingProvCRExitCriteria

2. List of Implementations

The following lists the reported implementations, the type of implementation, supported PROV encodings and the URL of the implementation.

Implementation Type:

Application
Framework/API
Service
Vocabulary
Constraints Validator

Table 1: List of implementations reported to the PROV Working Group.
#	Name	Type	PROV Encodings
1	StatJR eBook system	Application	PROV-O, PROV-JSON
2	PoN	Application	PROV-N
3	WingsProvenanceExport	Application	PROV-O
4	Taverna	Application	PROV-O
5	CollabMap	Application	PROV-JSON
6	WebLab-PROV	Application	PROV-O, PROV-N
7	ProvToolbox	Framework / API Service	PROV-O, PROV-N, PROV-XML, PROV-JSON
8	Provenance for Earth Science	Application Service	PROV-O
9	Provenance Environment (ProvEn) Services	Application Service	PROV-O
10	Annotation Inference Framework	Application Framework / API	PROV-O, PROV-N, PROV-XML, PROV-JSON
11	PROVoKing	Framework / API	PROV-O
12	Triplify	Service	PROV-O
13	Prov-gen	Application	PROV-N
14	OBIAMA (Ontology-Based Integrated Action Modelling Arena	Application	PROV-O
15	Amalgame	Application Framework / API Service	PROV-O
16	D2R Server	Service	PROV-O
17	Provenance server	Service	PROV-N, PROV-JSON
18	agentSwitch	Application	PROV-N, PROV-JSON
19	Oracle Enterprise Transactions Controls Governor 8.6.4	Application	PROV-O, PROV-XML
20	Pubby	Service	PROV-O
21	Semantic Proteomics Dashboard (SemPoD)	Application	PROV-O
22	DeFacto	Application	PROV-O
23	Quality Assessment Framework	Framework / API	PROV-O
24	Global Change Information System - Information Model and Semantic Application Prototypes	Application	PROV-O
25	OpenUp Prov	Application	PROV-O
26	APROVeD: Automatic Provenance Derivation	Application	PROV-N, PROV-JSON
27	Raw2LD	Application	PROV-O
28	PROV-N to Neo4J DB mapping	Application	PROV-N
29	Earth System Science Server	Application	PROV-XML, PROV-JSON
30	prov-api	Framework / API	PROV-O
31	Policy Reasoning Framework	Framework / API	PROV-O
32	Informed Rural Passenger Information Infrastructure	Application	PROV-O
33	PubFlow Provenance Archive	Application Framework / API	PROV-O, PROV-XML
34	PROV Python library	Framework / API	PROV-N, PROV-JSON
35	csv2rdf4lod-automation	Application	PROV-O
36	recoprov	Application	PROV-O, PROV-N
37	DataFAQs	Application	PROV-O
38	provx2o	Application	PROV-O, PROV-XML
39	Hedgehog	Application	PROV-XML
40	QuerioCity research prototype	Application Framework / API Service	PROV-O
41	Tinga Provenance Service	Service	PROV-O, PROV-JSON
42	Human Computation ontology	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
43	tavernaprov	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
44	The Open Provenance Model for Workflows (OPMW)	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
45	roevo	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
46	wfprov	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
47	P-plan	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
48	Provenance Vocabulary Core Ontology Specification	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
49	Systems molecular biology provenance ontology (SysPro)	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O, None
50	Yanfeng Shu	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
51	ISO_19115_Lineage	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O, none
52	PAV Provenance, Authoring and Versioning	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
53	cProv	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-N, PROV-XML
54	PML 3.0	Vocabulary Extension	PROV-O
55	Music Ontology to Media Value Chain Ontology and PROV-O Ontology Mapping	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-O
56	PROV-DM: the PROV data model	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-N
57	DBpedia	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-O
58	AERS-LD	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-O
59	TWC Healthdata	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-O
60	University of Southampton Open Data	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-XML
61	SIGNA	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-O
62	Dublin Core to PROV mapping	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-O
63	OECD Linked Data	Vocabulary Usage	PROV-O
64	prov-check	Validator	PROV-O
65	Prov-Validator	Validator	PROV-O, PROV-N, PROV-XML, PROV-JSON
66	checker.pl	Validator	PROV-XML

3. Feature Coverage

3.1 PROV Usage

This section enumerates the PROV-DM terms [PROV-DM] that are consumed (), produced (), or both consumed and produced () by a particular implementation.

Hover over the numbers to see the implementation name.

Table 2: Coverage of PROV-DM terms in implementations of type Application, Framework / API, or Service.
PROV Component	Term				Term
C1: Entities/Activities	Entity	2	19	18	Entity
	Activity	3	18	18	Activity
	Generation	3	15	18	Generation
	Usage	3	14	20	Usage
	Communication	1	7	5	Communication
	Start	2	10	6	Start
	End	2	10	7	End
	Invalidation	1	8		Invalidation
C2: Derivations	Derivation	3	12	13	Derivation
	Revision	2	7	3	Revision
	Quotation	1	7		Quotation
	Primary Source	2	7	1	Primary Source
C3: Agents	Agent	2	18	18	Agent
	Attribution	1	10	9	Attribution
	Association	2	10	18	Association
	Delegation	1	8	6	Delegation
	Plan	3	7	10	Plan
	Person	2	10	6	Person
	Organization	1	10	2	Organization
	SoftwareAgent	2	9	8	SoftwareAgent
	Influence	1	5	3	Influence
C4: Bundles	Bundle	1	8	7	Bundle
C5: Alternate	Alternate	2	6	3	Alternate
C5: Alternate	Specialization	1	7	3	Specialization
C6: Collections	Collection		7	1	Collection
	EmptyCollection		5	2	EmptyCollection
	Membership		8	1	Membership
Other Elements	Identififer	1	8	6	Identififer
	Attribute	2	8	7	Attribute
	Label	1	8	6	Label
	Location	1	6	3	Location
	Role	2	6	2	Role
	Type	1	9	8	Type
	Value	1	8	7	Value

3.2 PROV Usage by Extension

Table 3: PROV Terms extended by Vocabularies.
PROV Component	Term	Total
C1: Entities/Activities	Entity	12
	Activity	12
	Generation	11
	Usage	11
	Communication	3
	Start	4
	End	5
	Invalidation	2
C2: Derivations	Derivation	5
	Revision	3
	Quotation	2
	Primary Source	2
C3: Agents	Agent	10
	Attribution	7
	Association	9
	Delegation	3
	Plan	9
	Person	3
	Organization	2
	SoftwareAgent	5
	Influence	6
C4: Bundles	Bundle	3
C5: Alternate	Alternate	2
C5: Alternate	Specialization	2
C6: Collections	Collection	1
	EmptyCollection	0
	Membership	1
Other Elements	Identififer	0
	Attribute	2
	Label	1
	Location	5
	Role	5
	Type	1
	Value	3

3.3 PROV Usage in Datasets

Table 4: PROV Terms used by Datasets and Vocabularies.
PROV Component	Term	Total
C1: Entities/Activities	Entity	6
	Activity	7
	Generation	7
	Usage	7
	Communication	4
	Start	3
	End	3
	Invalidation	1
C2: Derivations	Derivation	7
	Revision	3
	Quotation	1
	Primary Source	2
C3: Agents	Agent	7
	Attribution	6
	Association	5
	Delegation	3
	Plan	3
	Person	1
	Organization	1
	SoftwareAgent	2
	Influence	2
C4: Bundles	Bundle	1
C5: Alternate	Alternate	3
C5: Alternate	Specialization	3
C6: Collections	Collection	1
	EmptyCollection	1
	Membership	1
Other Elements	Identififer	1
	Attribute	1
	Label	1
	Location	2
	Role	2
	Type	1
	Value	2

3.4 PROV Constraints Implementation

Table 5: PROV Contraints [PROV-CONSTRAINTS] implemented by validators or other software
Constraint	#64	#65	#66
Constraint 22 (key-object)
Constraint 23 (key-properties)
Constraint 24 (unique-generation)
Constraint 25 (unique-invalidation)
Constraint 26 (unique-wasStartedBy)
Constraint 27 (unique-wasEndedBy)
Constraint 28 (unique-startTime)
Constraint 29 (unique-endTime)
Constraint 30 (start-precedes-end)
Constraint 31 (start-start-ordering)
Constraint 32 (end-end-ordering)
Constraint 33 (usage-within-activity)
Constraint 34 (generation-within-activity)
Constraint 35 (wasInformedBy-ordering)
Constraint 36 (generation-precedes-invalidation)
Constraint 37 (generation-precedes-usage)
Constraint 38 (usage-precedes-invalidation)
Constraint 39 (generation-generation-ordering)
Constraint 40 (invalidation-invalidation-ordering)
Constraint 41 (derivation-usage-generation-ordering)
Constraint 42 (derivation-generation-generation-ordering)
Constraint 43 (wasStartedBy-ordering)
Constraint 44 (wasEndedBy-ordering)
Constraint 45 (specialization-generation-ordering)
Constraint 46 (specialization-invalidation-ordering)
Constraint 47 (wasAssociatedWith-ordering)
Constraint 48 (wasAttributedTo-ordering)
Constraint 49 (actedOnBehalfOf-ordering)
Constraint 50 (typing)
Constraint 51 (impossible-unspecified-derivation-generation-use)
Constraint 52 (impossible-specialization-reflexive)
Constraint 53 (impossible-property-overlap)
Constraint 54 (impossible-object-property-overlap)
Constraint 55 (entity-activity-disjoint)
Constraint 56 (membership-empty-collection)

Note

The table above was produced from the results of running PROV-CONSTRAINTS test cases submitted by implementers.

4. Implementations Exchanging Provenance

Table 6: Implementations exchanging PROV with the representation(s) exchanged in parentheses. An implementation that supports every feature defined by the representation is denoted with All.
	Producer:	ProvToolbox	PROVoKing	Provenenane Server	APROVeD	PROV Python	Prov-Validator	PROV-DM

Consumer	Provenance Server	All (PROV-JSON)					All (PROV-JSON)
	Prov-Validator		All (PROV-O)	All (PROV-N)	Partial (PROV-N)	All (PROV-N)		All (PROV-N)
	prov-check	All (PROV-O)

Summary:

The Provenance Server (University of Southampton, Python code base) consumes provenance documents deposited by the ProvToolbox Converter and Prov-Validator (University of Southampton, Java code base)
The Prov-Validator (University of Southampton) validates:
- All PROV-O terms generated by PROVoKing (King's College London)
- All PROV-N terms generated by the Provenance Server and the PROV-Python library (University of Southampton, Python code base)
- The subset of PROV-N terms generated by APROVeD (Ghent University)
- All PROV-N terms from the examples in the PROV-DM documents
The prov-check (VU University of Amsterdam) validates all PROV-O terms converted by the ProvToolbox (University of Southampton)

Table 7: Features exchanged by PROV implementation pairs.
PROV Component	Producer:	#11	#7	Total	#17	#26	#55	Total
	Consumer:	#65	#64	Total	#65	#65	#65	Total
	Term	PROV-O			PROV-N
C1: Entities/Activities	Entity			2				3
	Activity			2				3
	Generation			2				3
	Usage			2				3
	Communication			2				2
	Start			2				2
	End			2				2
	Invalidation			2				2
C2: Derivations	Derivation			2				3
	Revision			2				2
	Quotation			2				2
	Primary Source			2				2
C3: Agents	Agent			2				3
	Attribution			2				2
	Association			2				3
	Delegation			2				2
	Plan			2				2
	Person			2				2
	Organization			2				3
	SoftwareAgent			2				2
	Influence			2				2
C4: Bundles	Bundle			2				3
C5: Alternate	Alternate			2				2
C5: Alternate	Specialization			2				2
C6: Collections	Collection			2				2
	EmptyCollection			2				2
	Membership			2				2
Other Elements	Identififer			2				2
	Attribute			2				2
	Label			2				2
	Location			2				2
	Role			2				3
	Type			2				3
	Value			2				2

Note

Although the Provenance Server (#17) and the Prov-Validator (#65) are from the same institution (i.e. University of Southampton), it is worth noting that they were built from two independent code bases (one in Python and the other in Java)

A. Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the following who reported their PROV implementations to us: Ali Mufajjul, Amir Sezavar Keshavarz, Ashley Smith, Chester Chen, Chris Baillie, Clément Caron, Daniel Garijo, Danius Michaelides, David Corsar, Edoardo Pignotti, Eric Stephan, Hook Hua, Irene Celino, Jacco van Ossenbruggen, James Cheney, James McCusker, Jens Lehmann, Jun Zhao, Kerry Taylor, Khalid Belhajjame, Landong Zuo, Luc Moreau, Luis M. Vilches-Blázquez, Michael Jewell, Mohamed Morsey, Olaf Hartig, Palma Raul, Paolo Missier, Paul Groth, Peer Brauer, Peter Slaughter, Reza B'Far, Rinke Hoekstra, Sara Magliacane, Sarven Capadisli, Satya Sahoo, Simon Miles, Spyros Kotoulas, Stephan Zednik, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Timothy Lebo, Tom De Nies, Trung Dong Huynh, Victor Rodriguez, Yanfeng Shu.

B. References

B.1 Informative references

[PROV-CONSTRAINTS]: James Cheney; Paolo Missier; Luc Moreau; eds. Constraints of the PROV Data Model. 30 April 2013, W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-prov-constraints-20130430/
[PROV-DM]: Luc Moreau; Paolo Missier; eds. PROV-DM: The PROV Data Model. 30 April 2013, W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-prov-dm-20130430/
[PROV-N]: Luc Moreau; Paolo Missier; eds. PROV-N: The Provenance Notation. 30 April 2013, W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-prov-n-20130430/
[PROV-O]: Timothy Lebo; Satya Sahoo; Deborah McGuinness; eds. PROV-O: The PROV Ontology. 30 April 2013, W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-prov-o-20130430/
[PROV-OVERVIEW]: Paul Groth; Luc Moreau; eds. PROV-OVERVIEW: An Overview of the PROV Family of Documents. 30 April 2013, W3C Note. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-overview-20130430/

HOME
ABOUT
AUCTIONS
SHIPPING
FEES
TOOLS
HOW
FAQ
CONTACT

Original Source | Taken Source

PROV Implementation Report

W3C Working Group Note 30 April 2013

Abstract

Status of This Document

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

1.1 Meeting the Exit Criteria

2. List of Implementations

3. Feature Coverage

3.1 PROV Usage

3.2 PROV Usage by Extension

3.3 PROV Usage in Datasets

3.4 PROV Constraints Implementation

4. Implementations Exchanging Provenance

A. Acknowledgements

B. References

B.1 Informative references