- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 17:42:09 +0200
- To: Fadi Maali <fadi.maali@deri.org>
- Cc: Jeni Tennison <jeni@theodi.org>, "public-gld-comments@w3.org" <public-gld-comments@w3.org>, "public-prov-comments@w3.org" <public-prov-comments@w3.org>, Stuart Harrison <stuart.harrison@theodi.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJCyKRrSooKK5umMth+o8QjJe+80n_L7m2e-pcpACRJ81eWvhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi, I'm fine with a pointer but I think it should also be on dcat:Dataset. Also, with respect to Andrea's comment. PROV is already mapped to dublin core including dct:provenance. Thanks Paul On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Fadi Maali <fadi.maali@deri.org> wrote: > Hello Jeni and Paul, > > Thanks for your feedback regarding representing provenance in DCAT. > > DCAT properties were based on a survey of existing government catalogs. At > the time of the survey, catalogs didn't include provenance description. > I totally agree that including a provenance description is very valuable. > However, in the favour of keeping DCAT minimal and focused, I suggest that > instead of adding properties from PROV to the DCAT spec, a link to PROV-O > ontology is added as currently implemented in the draft (Catalog record > section): > > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/dcat/index.html#Class:_Catalog_record > > I hope that is sufficient. > > -------------------------------------------------- > Fadi Maali > PhD student @ DERI > Irish Research Council Embark Scholarship holder > http://www.deri.ie/users/fadi-maali > > On 3 Apr 2013, at 19:25, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote: > > > Hi Jeni > > > > +1 for this. From the PROV perspective we are actual ok with both. In > our mapping to from dublin core to PROV dct:provenance maps to > prov:has_provenance. > > > > It would be nice to encourage people to use PROV in the DCAT document > though for describing provenance. > > > > Thanks > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Jeni Tennison <jeni@theodi.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Looking through DCAT, I notice that there's no property that is > recommended for indicating the provenance of a Distribution or > CatalogRecord. > > > > Would it be appropriate to include prov:has_provenance as a property of > dcat:Distribution and dcat:CatalogRecord, to point to a provenance record? > Or dct:provenance to fit in with the other properties. > > > > (I guess one source of my question is that I'm not sure what the > rationale is in deciding whether a property is included in DCAT or not.) > > > > Cheers, > > > > Jeni > > -- > > Jeni Tennison, Technical Director theODI.org > > +44 (0) 7974 420 482 @JeniT > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) > > http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ > > Assistant Professor > > - Web & Media Group | Department of Computer Science > > - The Network Institute > > VU University Amsterdam > > -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl) http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/ Assistant Professor - Web & Media Group | Department of Computer Science - The Network Institute VU University Amsterdam
Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 15:42:37 UTC