PROV-ISSUE-657 (PG DC review): Review from DC Note- Paul Groth [Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core]

PROV-ISSUE-657 (PG DC review): Review from DC Note- Paul Groth [Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/657

Raised by: Daniel Garijo
On product: Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core

==Review of PROV-DC==
Abstract

- "the resource" --> "a resource"
- I don't know what " Translating these terms to PROV makes the contained provenance information explicit within a provenance chain" means?
- can you replace "provenance chain" with provenance? I don't know what provenance chain buys as a term

Section 1.2
- "interested on" --> "interested in"
- "community discussions" --> "community discussion"
- maybe replace "Some terms may have misleading names …" with "Some terms may imply a mapping (e.g. …), but do not in fact correspond.

Section 2.1
- "DCMI terms hold a lot of " ---> "Many DCMI terms can be used to describe provenance information about a resource:"

Section 2.2
- "Since we cannot ensure that the published resource has not suffered…" --> …has not gone through…

- "it has been chosen as guideline in the complex mapping" --> "it has been chosen as the approach for the complex mapping defined in this document."

Section 3.1

- dct:Creator - "He has the attribution for the outcome of that activity." --> "They have the attribution…'

- dct:contributor - comma after Therefore

- dct:isFormatOf - comma after Thus

- dot:references - comma after In PROV

Section 3.2 
- You should say why you introduce these? I think it's for the Complex Mappings is that correct? 
- You say these are properties but they are actually classes in the last paragraph of the section? why?

Section 3.4
- It's not a list of possibilities - you provide two

Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2013 18:11:17 UTC