Re: PROV-ISSUE-159 (Tlebo): note on how PROV-O inteprets DM's "type" and "subtype" [Ontology]

Thanks, Daniel.

The distinction between DM and prov-o's type has been well established.
I closed the issue.

-Tim

On Mar 6, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Daniel Garijo wrote:

> Hi Tim,
> after the latest changes to the DM, does this issue still hold?
> Thanks,
> Daniel
> 
> 2011/11/21 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
> 
> PROV-ISSUE-159 (Tlebo): note on how PROV-O inteprets DM's "type" and "subtype" [Ontology]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/159
> 
> Raised by: Timothy Lebo
> On product: Ontology
> 
> The DM mentions "type" and "subtype". Should/Does the PROV-O HTML explicitly state that these should be interpreted as rdf:type and rdfs:subClassOf?
> 
> This is a follow up from http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/144
> 
> Thanks,
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> 
>