Re: Remove the Data Vocabularies section from the DWBP document

Thanks Ghislain!!!

just one more question, does it make sense to say that when defining
machine readable metadata existing standard terms/vocabularies should be
used? For example, DCAT should be used to provide descriptive metadata.

cheers,
Bernadette


2015-05-20 11:07 GMT-03:00 Ghislain Atemezing <auguste.atemezing@eurecom.fr>
:

>
> Le 20 mai 2015 à 15:53, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br> a
> écrit :
>
> Thank you very much for the update!
>
>
> You are our champion here.. So many thanks to you for all the work you are
> doing to have this BP doc ready on time… ;)
>
>
> So, if I understood correctly the difference between Use Standardized
> terms and Re-use vocabularies is that in the first case  there is a
> body/organization which defines the term as a clear reference and in the
> second case the vocabulary may not be a standard. Is this correct?
>
>
> IMO yes. Reusing vocabularies make sense when you are building a new
> vocabulary/publishing data in LD world or want to annotate a resource.
>
>
> If I understood correct, then I propose to include the BP Use standardized
> terms together with the BP Re-use vocabularies because I think they
> complement each other. These BP will be in the Data Vocabularies section.
> What do you think?
>
>
> Hmmm…Again yes, although we will certainly need to rewrite stuff in the
> new section.
>
> Cheers,
> Ghislain
> ---------------------------------------
> Ghislain A. Atemezing, Ph.D
> ghislain.atemezing@gmail.com
> Google+: http://google.com/+GhislainATEMEZING
> Twitter: @gatemezing
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------