VOResource 1.1: relationship type vocabulary

[Markus Demleitner]

Dear colleagues,

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 04:18:29PM -0400, Accomazzi, Alberto wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Mireille Louys <mireille.louys at unistra.fr>
> wrote:
> 
> > But before that , I want to emphasise that some terms borrowed from the
> > Datacite vocabulary definitions are also interesting for representing roles
> > in the Provenance DM currently developped .
>
> Indeed!

Certainly, the hope is that provenance will be able to re-use, and
possibly extend if necessary, this vocabulary.  In order to get
VOResource 1.1 done in a reasonable timeframe, I'd like to avoid
entangling it with Provenance, though.  Since adding additional terms
later is always possible (and indeed the reason to externalise the
terms), I'd maintain there's no need to, either.  If, however,
something in there goes *against* provenance plans, this is of course
a good moment to speak up.

> > That would probably mean to allocate a different time slot to the
> > Semantics session with at least one Registry session and at least one DM in
> > order for interested people to join.
> >
> > What is your feeling about that?

We should definitely talk about vocabulary maintenance; in the
context of the datalink vocabulary, I've put up an experiment
already:

http://wiki.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/VEPs

Perhaps that could be used as a starting point for a more general
discussion on vocabulary maintenance.

On the more concrete topics of the relationship_type vocabulary, I'm
responding in another mail limited to the registry mailing list,
where I'd suggest further discussion on relationship_type terms
should take place in order to not annoy folks on semantics and DM.

         -- Markus