- From: kcoyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 15:37:18 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@riccardoAlbertoni , thanks. I really like the idea of "was derived from" because it allows the derived profile to differ and doesn't force it to be hierarchical. It may be that both are needed in profileOnt to cover both the hierarchical and the non-hierarchical derivations. I also think that "was derived from" is more conceptually similar to the DC Singapore Framework's "uses". It makes a connection without enforcing hierarchy, which is often too rigid of a relationship. #485 suggests that profileOf would be a subproperty of prov:wasDerivedFrom, and therefore further defines the type of derivation. PROV uses types, however, as in "prov:type='prov:Revision'". This seems to make sub-classing of derivedFrom more complex. In other discussions people have mentioned that a relationship between a vocabulary and a profile might be considered an extension. Extension looks to me to fit into a prov:type. All of this leads me to think that we could (eventually) consider types of profiles. (See [comment](https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/435#issuecomment-426928897) on types of profiles.) At the moment, one view of profileOf is that it is a hierarchical relationship, but I see it as being more variable. -- GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/507#issuecomment-434735180 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2018 15:37:20 UTC