Misleading definitions of dqv properties

Hi Riccardo, Antoine,

I was presenting the DQV and realised that the properties “dqv:hasMetric”, “dqv:hasDimension” and “dqv:hasCategory” are a bit misleading - especially if for example it has to be compared with daQ. I would suggest that they are renamed to “dqv:inDimension” etc… (esp. that they are inverse of daQ properties). 

For example, dqv:hasDimension is defined to be the inverse of daq:hasMetric.. whilst in dqv we also have dqv:hasMetric. This might lead to unnecessary inconsistencies. 

What do you think?

Cheers,
Jer