Using PROV to express conformance results

Dear PROV WG,

I would like to ask your advise about the possibility of using the
PROV ontology to model the results of a conformance test on a given
resource with respect to a set of requirements, as defined in ISO
19115 [1,2]. The usage context is related to work under-way on
GeoDCAT-AP that I've already mentioned in another thread [3].

Dublin Core provides a property that can be used for this purpose,
namely, dct:conformsTo, which is however able to address only one use
case - i.e., when the test results are positive.

PROV might provide a more general solution (allowing more results
outcomes, the ability to specify who did the test, when, etc.), but
since dct:conformsTo is not included in the PROV-DC mappings [4], it
is unclear which could be the recommended way of doing that with PROV.

On a related note, I would also like to mention that the current
proposal under discussion in GeoDCAT-AP is to use the Evaluation and
Reporting Language (EARL) vocabulary [5]. A (tentative) mapping table
between ISO 19115 and EARL is available at:

https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/140207

Can PROV be used for the same purpose, and how?

Looking forward to your feedback,

Best,

Andrea

----
[1]https://geo-ide.noaa.gov/wiki/index.php?title=ISO_Data_Quality
[2]https://geo-ide.noaa.gov/wiki/index.php?title=Conformance_Test_Results
[3]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2015Apr/0003.html
[4]http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dc/#term_conformsTo
[5]http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10-Schema/


-- 
Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
Scientific / Technical Project Officer
European Commission DG JRC
Institute for Environment & Sustainability
Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data
Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
21027 Ispra VA, Italy

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/

----
The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
position of the European Commission.

Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2015 09:44:41 UTC