[VEP-0002] DataLink semantics vocabulary enhacement proposal = new DataDocumentation term

[Markus Demleitner]

Dear DAL,

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 12:48:02PM +0200, Carlos Rodrigo wrote:
> And yes, Carlos wants, in some cases, to link associated
> publications to a given record :-)
> 
> My "use case" is more related to publications about how the record
> (spectrum, image, object distance in a catalogue...) was generated.
> Just to mention, I think that we all know that the authors of the
> works that have been necessary to produce those records usually
> like that their work is recognized and that the corresponding
> references appear in a place as relevant as possible.

I'm still not quite sure what this might be -- perhaps a concrete
example would help?  Plus: If you had to tell Mark Taylor what TOPCAT
should suggest as an action with such a link, what would it be?
Under which circumstances should it show up, more generally, in a
links menu of a sufficiently sophisticated client?

But be that as it may:

> If people think that it is worth to make a difference between
> generation and derivation document, it could be nice. But, if we
> try to follow your idea of keeping the list of terms as short as
> possible unless necessary, I would just keep "documentation". And
> think about childs in the future if necessary.

I like that conclusion.  I'd still be able to add some text to the
discussion part of VEP-0002 as regards what clients are supposed to
do with such links; as usual, *use* cases help a lot when figuring
out what to do...

Be that as it may: I'm sufficiently convinced that the term as it is
is fine, it seems to me that consensus has by and large been reached
and that by the next TCG, people there can review
https://volute.g-vo.org/svn/trunk/projects/semantics/veps/VEP0002.txt
-- until then (~ end of the year) you can still register your
dissent here.

        -- Markus