Re: PROV-ISSUE-404 (Feedback_SS): Feedback on the mapping from Satya Sahoo [Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core]

Hi Satya,
thanks to you for reviewing the doc.
Yes, I have listed that in in the changelog section, but it is not done yet.
Best,
Daniel

2012/7/5 Satya Sahoo <satya.sahoo@case.edu>

> Hi Daniel,
> Thanks for responding to my comments! Regarding the point that many of the
> terms have been excluded from the mapping as no corresponding term is
> defined in PROV -is it possible to move them to provenance metadata
> although no mappings need to be defined?
>
> I am fine with response to the organization comment and approach for
> reconciling blank nodes.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best,
> Satya
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Daniel Garijo <
> dgarijo@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es> wrote:
>
>> Hi Satya,
>> I have answered your review here:
>> https://github.com/dcmi/DC-PROV-Mapping/wiki/Satya-sahoo
>> The changes that have to be done to the document are listed here:
>> https://github.com/dcmi/DC-PROV-Mapping/wiki/Dealing-with-feedback
>> in the changelog section.
>>
>> Best,
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>>
>> 2012/6/9 Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
>>
>>> PROV-ISSUE-404 (Feedback_SS): Feedback on the mapping from Satya Sahoo
>>> [Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core]
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/404
>>>
>>> Raised by: Daniel Garijo
>>> On product: Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core
>>>
>>> A few comments that may be useful as starting points for further
>>> discussions/review :
>>> 1.  Many terms currently listed in the description metadata are also
>>> provenance-specific:
>>> educationLevel (the qualification of person/agent is relevant provenance
>>> in appointments/promotions etc.)
>>> license (why - type of license is relevant provenance for
>>> legal/contractual enforcement)
>>> spatial (where - corresponds to prov:Location)
>>> temporal (when - corresponds to xsd:DateTime)
>>> isRequiredBy (why, who - relevant provenance for legal/contracts)
>>> type (which - relevant provenance for all PROV type attribute)
>>> language, format (what - provenance information for rendering)
>>>
>>> Additional terms that describe provenance include accessRights (why -
>>> why is agent not liable for sharing object with given access rights),
>>> accrualPeriodicity (when)
>>>
>>> 2. Both rdfs:subPropertyOf and rdfs:subClassOf are specialization (of
>>> property and class respectively). Hence, both "Direct Mappings" and "PROV
>>> Specializations" can be merged into a single section of "Specialization"
>>>
>>> 3. The mechanism to reconcile blank nodes to a specific URI is not
>>> clear. Will it be done manually or automatically?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>