- From: janvoskuil via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 07:06:04 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
I think the most important point here is the distinction between agent --- which PROV defines as a (non-rigid) role concept --- and entity. Some roles in CI Roles, MARC and other role taxonomies qualify as agent roles (creator, collector, funder), whereas others qualify as usages (addressee, recipient, dedicatee). In some cases, it can go either way, depending on the specifics of each individual case (stakeholder). I totally agree with Makx's point that people responsible for assigning metadata should not have to understand all these finer distinctions. They shouldn't have to choose, because in practice, different people will make different choices in similar situations, leading to a loss of generality. Therefore, to accommodate the incorporation of said role taxonomies in a metadata scheme based on DCAT and PROV, it would be useful to be able to use a generic relation that expressly abstracts away from all these and related distinctions. This will be a relation between arbitrary entities and entities that can bear responsibility, i.e., instances of prov:Entity and of prov:Agent that are also instances of foaf:Agent. Or, simply put, a relation between instances of prov:Entity and instances of foaf:Agent. -- GitHub Notification of comment by janvoskuil Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1521#issuecomment-1154798430 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2022 07:06:05 UTC