Re: `generator` in Schema.org?

I think PROV covers more than schema.org can ever aim to. We cannot have a
single monolithic super-ontology for all domains. Vocabulary reuse has been
one of the pillars of the Semantic Web. I don't understand why people would
want to push everything and anything into schema.org.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 at 17:32, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi, Martynas–
>
> Yes, thanks for the suggestion!
>
> I'd looked at PROV, and while it's not a perfect match for my use case
> (for example, there didn't seem to be an easy way to express the version
> of the software), I think Schema.org should refer to that for a more
> complete (if more intricate) set of provenance information.
>
> I've generated an issue for this [1], in case you're interested.
>
> [1] https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/809
>
> Regards–
> –Doug
>
> On 9/29/15 5:58 AM, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:
> > Doug,
> >
> > I think the Provenance vocabulary is what you are looking for:
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#wasGeneratedBy
> >
> >
> > Martynas
> > graphityhq.com
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
> >> Hey, folks–
> >>
> >> I looked through the current list at Schema.org, but I couldn't figure
> out
> >> how to express the name and version of the software which was used to
> create
> >> a document.
> >>
> >> For example, if I create an SVG document using Adobe Illustrator, I'm
> the
> >> `creator`, but the `generator` is Illustrator. Currently, this is
> normally
> >> expressed in a comment, but I'd like to have a way to use Schema.org
> terms
> >> for the name and version of the generator.
> >>
> >> Is this currently possible? If not, could this be added?
> >>
> >> Thanks–
> >> –Doug
> >>
> >
>