- From: Fadi Maali <fadi.maali@deri.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:01:08 +0100
- To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@theodi.org>
- Cc: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, public-gld-comments@w3.org, public-prov-comments@w3.org, Stuart Harrison <stuart.harrison@theodi.org>
Thank you Jeni! typo corrected as well. Best regards, Fadi -------------------------------------------------- Fadi Maali PhD student @ DERI Irish Research Council Embark Scholarship holder http://www.deri.ie/users/fadi-maali On 30 May 2013, at 13:32, Jeni Tennison <jeni@theodi.org> wrote: > Hi Fadi, > > (Per process) OK, that's fine. > > s/particualr/particular/ > > Jeni > > On 30 May 2013, at 12:13, Fadi Maali <fadi.maali@deri.org> wrote: > >> Hello Jeni and Paul, >> >> Thanks for your feedback regarding representing provenance in DCAT. >> >> DCAT properties were based on a survey of existing government catalogs. At the time of the survey, catalogs didn't include provenance description. >> I totally agree that including a provenance description is very valuable. However, in the favour of keeping DCAT minimal and focused, I suggest that >> instead of adding properties from PROV to the DCAT spec, a link to PROV-O ontology is added as currently implemented in the draft (Catalog record section): >> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/dcat/index.html#Class:_Catalog_record >> >> I hope that is sufficient. >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> Fadi Maali >> PhD student @ DERI >> Irish Research Council Embark Scholarship holder >> http://www.deri.ie/users/fadi-maali >> >> On 3 Apr 2013, at 19:25, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote: >> >>> Hi Jeni >>> >>> +1 for this. From the PROV perspective we are actual ok with both. In our mapping to from dublin core to PROV dct:provenance maps to prov:has_provenance. >>> >>> It would be nice to encourage people to use PROV in the DCAT document though for describing provenance. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Jeni Tennison <jeni@theodi.org> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Looking through DCAT, I notice that there's no property that is recommended for indicating the provenance of a Distribution or CatalogRecord. >>> >>> Would it be appropriate to include prov:has_provenance as a property of dcat:Distribution and dcat:CatalogRecord, to point to a provenance record? Or dct:provenance to fit in with the other properties. >>> >>> (I guess one source of my question is that I'm not sure what the rationale is in deciding whether a property is included in DCAT or not.) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Jeni >>> -- >>> Jeni Tennison, Technical Director theODI.org >>> +44 (0) 7974 420 482 @JeniT >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) >>> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ >>> Assistant Professor >>> - Web & Media Group | Department of Computer Science >>> - The Network Institute >>> VU University Amsterdam >> > > -- > Jeni Tennison, Technical Director theODI.org > +44 (0) 7974 420 482 @JeniT >
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2013 13:01:39 UTC