ISSUE-657: Review of DC Note- Paul Groth
PG DC review
Review of DC Note- Paul Groth
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core
- Raised by:
- Daniel Garijo
- Opened on:
- 2013-04-03
- Description:
- ==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 - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- PROV-ISSUE-657 (PG DC review): Review from DC Note- Paul Groth [Mapping PROV-O to Dublin Core] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-04-03)
Related notes:
No additional notes.
Display change log
