VEP-004: #counterpart in datalink/core

[Markus Demleitner]

Dear Mireille,

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 11:56:41AM +0200, Mireille LOUYS wrote:
> In the description text below, I agree with the first part  .
> What is the meaning of the last part?
> 
> 'spectra of dust of common origin but different laboratories'

Uh, I forgot a few words there.  I've fixed it to be

  spectra of dust of common origin but obtained by different
  laboratories would be #counterparts as well.

in volute rev. 5842.

> are good examples of dataproducts of different provenance.
> 
> Can we put it in the example section ?

We could -- but there's already used-in, where actual real-life
examples can sit.

But whatever section such information sits in, it is forgotten once
the term is in place, and all that is left then is the definition.
That's about what our upstream (RDF) standards give us.  And I think
that should work, too, as long as we are a bit more careful when
writing the definitions than I have been in VEP-004.

[DAL folks: Semantics talk only below here]

> Something I am not comfortable with in the VEP process is the fact that we
> discuss one term , separated from the others and therefore do not always see
> the coverage, depencies  and overlap between the notions .

Well, the Rationale should contain a discussion of how this term
relates to the other terms in the vocabulary and how it fits in the
global picture.  

Beyond that -- well, there is the vocabulary link at the top of the
VEP, so the full list of terms is just a click away.  Of course,
that's not nearly enough if someone new to a vocabulary wants to
understand things.  If you have good ideas or even just a collection
of questions we ought to help such people with, I'd certainly like to
hear them; vocabulary work is hard, but I'm sure we can do better
in making it as simple as it can be.

Thanks,

           Markus