Re: PROV-ISSUE-404 (Feedback_SS): Feedback on the mapping from Satya Sahoo [Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core]

Hi Daniel,
Thanks for responding to my comments! Regarding the point that many of the
terms have been excluded from the mapping as no corresponding term is
defined in PROV -is it possible to move them to provenance metadata
although no mappings need to be defined?

I am fine with response to the organization comment and approach for
reconciling blank nodes.

Thanks.

Best,
Satya

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Daniel Garijo <
dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es> wrote:

> Hi Satya,
> I have answered your review here:
> https://github.com/dcmi/DC-PROV-Mapping/wiki/Satya-sahoo
> The changes that have to be done to the document are listed here:
> https://github.com/dcmi/DC-PROV-Mapping/wiki/Dealing-with-feedback
> in the changelog section.
>
> Best,
> Daniel
>
>
>
> 2012/6/9 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
>
>> PROV-ISSUE-404 (Feedback_SS): Feedback on the mapping from Satya Sahoo
>> [Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/404
>>
>> Raised by: Daniel Garijo
>> On product: Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core
>>
>> A few comments that may be useful as starting points for further
>> discussions/review :
>> 1.  Many terms currently listed in the description metadata are also
>> provenance-specific:
>> educationLevel (the qualification of person/agent is relevant provenance
>> in appointments/promotions etc.)
>> license (why - type of license is relevant provenance for
>> legal/contractual enforcement)
>> spatial (where - corresponds to prov:Location)
>> temporal (when - corresponds to xsd:DateTime)
>> isRequiredBy (why, who - relevant provenance for legal/contracts)
>> type (which - relevant provenance for all PROV type attribute)
>> language, format (what - provenance information for rendering)
>>
>> Additional terms that describe provenance include accessRights (why - why
>> is agent not liable for sharing object with given access rights),
>> accrualPeriodicity (when)
>>
>> 2. Both rdfs:subPropertyOf and rdfs:subClassOf are specialization (of
>> property and class respectively). Hence, both "Direct Mappings" and "PROV
>> Specializations" can be merged into a single section of "Specialization"
>>
>> 3. The mechanism to reconcile blank nodes to a specific URI is not clear.
>> Will it be done manually or automatically?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>