ISSUE-32: How to resolve conflicting definitions when adopting the DPV vocabulary?
How to resolve conflicting definitions when adopting the DPV vocabulary?
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Raised by:
- Harshvardhan J. Pandit
- Opened on:
- 2019-11-26
- Description:
- Description: (was asked in context of SEMANTiCS poster) If an adopter has a term with the same (general) label e.g. fraud detection, but with a different definition than the one provided by the DPV, how should the term be added or resolved?
Reporter: Harsh
Notes: use a different name space, for approval in the our terminology, we strongly suggest or will try to keep unambiguous labels, e.g. mark spefific kind of "fraud detection" then it should be labelled as "fraud detection for XYZ" or alike. | suggestion is: make a remark on how to propose extensions in the primer document with the use case that shows how to use this vocvabulary? - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- dpvcg-ISSUE-32: How to resolve conflicting definitions when adopting the DPV vocabulary? (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2019-11-26)
Related notes:
No additional notes.
Display change log
