- From: Data Privacy Vocabularies and Controls Community Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:19:11 +0000
- To: public-dpvcg@w3.org
dpvcg-ISSUE-32: How to resolve conflicting definitions when adopting the DPV vocabulary? https://www.w3.org/community/dpvcg/track/issues/32 Raised by: Harshvardhan Pandit On product: Description: (was asked in context of SEMANTiCS poster) If an adopter has a term with the same (general) label e.g. fraud detection, but with a different definition than the one provided by the DPV, how should the term be added or resolved? Reporter: Harsh Notes: use a different name space, for approval in the our terminology, we strongly suggest or will try to keep unambiguous labels, e.g. mark spefific kind of "fraud detection" then it should be labelled as "fraud detection for XYZ" or alike. | suggestion is: make a remark on how to propose extensions in the primer document with the use case that shows how to use this vocvabulary?
Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2019 16:19:12 UTC