Re: dwbp-ISSUE-214: prov:Agent vs duv:Agent [Data Usage Vocabulary]

By the way, since prov:Agent is equivalent to dct:Agent [1] and foaf:Agent
is also equivalent to dct:Agent [2], they are all equivalent, so, we are
actually using

prov:Agent = dct:Agent = foaf:Agent

I would add this to the document for clarification.

Regards,
João Paulo

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-dc-20130430/
[2] http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/

From:  João Paulo Almeida <jpalmeida@ieee.org>
Date:  Friday, November 20, 2015 at 11:23 AM
To:  Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
Cc:  Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: dwbp-ISSUE-214: prov:Agent vs duv:Agent [Data Usage
Vocabulary]

Hi Eric,

I would exclude foaf:Project altogether.  It is still in status ³testing² in
foaf, and it¹s not particularly relevant for data usage to make that
distinction. So, I¹d just exclude foaf:Project from the scope and use
prov:Agent. 

There is a separate issue of whether we need to create duv:Agent. I¹d say we
DO NOT need to create duv:Agent, because we only use prov:Agent as range of
properties in the DUV. (And prov:Agent is general enough and established in
a well-defined W3C recommendation, and by the way it is equivalent to
dct:Agent, see http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-dc-20130430/ .)

By the way, the diagram in the current DUV version includes prov:Agent
twice. This should be fixed for clarity.

Regards,
João Paulo


From:  Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
Date:  Friday, November 20, 2015 at 11:06 AM
To:  João Paulo Almeida <jpalmeida@ieee.org>
Cc:  Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: dwbp-ISSUE-214: prov:Agent vs duv:Agent [Data Usage
Vocabulary]

João Paulo,

Thank you for your question.  You are correct that foaf:Project is not a
prov:Agent in the vocabulary.  In citations an Agent to include project,
organization, or person can designated as the publisher, distributor, or
producer.  My question is because prov:Agent does not specify foaf:Project
as an agent, should I use prov:Agent or should I create duv:Agent (that I
guess could be a subclass of prov:Agent?)

What do you think?

Thanks,

Eric   

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 4:56 AM, João Paulo Almeida <jpalmeida@ieee.org>
wrote:
> Dear Eric,
> 
> Would you please clarify the issue?
> 
> As far as I am aware, foaf:Project is not a subclass of prov:Agent.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> João Paulo
> 
> 
> On 20/11/15, 9:40 AM, "Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Issue
> Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org <mailto:sysbot%2Btracker@w3.org> > wrote:
> 
>> >dwbp-ISSUE-214: prov:Agent vs duv:Agent [Data Usage Vocabulary]
>> >
>> >http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/214
>> >
>> >Raised by: Eric Stephan
>> >On product: Data Usage Vocabulary
>> >
>> >Data vocabulary reuse question: In the citation model, is it better to
>> >use prov:Agent that is a superclass to new classes such as foaf:Project
>> >or should we create a new class duv:Agent?
>> >
>> >
>> >
> 
> 
>