<div dir="ltr">Hi Mireille and Markus,<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Mireille Louys <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mireille.louys@unistra.fr" target="_blank">mireille.louys@unistra.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",Times,serif">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 .</span></p></div></blockquote><div>Indeed! <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><p><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",Times,serif">I think this list of
terms and the topic of vocabularies could benefit from a
splinter meeting or a slot in the Semantic session in Trieste,
next October. </span><br></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">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.</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">What is your feeling
about that?<br></font></p></div></blockquote><div>Good idea, count me in.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><blockquote type="cite"><pre>(1) style mixture. I have kept the classic VOResource terms
(served-by, related-to, etc), and I think we have to do that as these
terms are in active use. I have, however, taken over the DataCite
terms that I could see some use for in the VO. These use CamelCase.
I readily admit that's ugly and potentially annoying since resource
authors will always have to remember which style a specific term
uses. If you really can't stand it, I see two alternatives:
a) Go all the way to DataCite style. This breaks some VO
infrastructure, enough to make me reject that for a 1.1 release
b) Change DataCite terms into the legacy VOResource 1.0 style
(is-supplement-to, etc). That'd make things somewhat harder for
VOResource->DataCite translators, but I could live with that. If
people speak out for this, I'd do it.</pre>
</blockquote>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> I would prefer an
homogeneous vocabulary . So option b) gets my preference .</font></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I also have a slight preference for option b). And I don't think having to go to a v.2 (rather than 1.1) is a huge burden, but people who are directly affected by the change should speak up!</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><blockquote type="cite"><pre>Terms in DataCite that I think won't serve forseeable discovery use
cases and that I hence didn't include in the vocabulary:
IsCitedBy HasMetadata <wbr>IsMetadataFor IsReferencedBy <wbr> References
IsDocumentedBy Documents <wbr>IsCompiledBy Compiles IsVariantFormOf
IsOriginalFormOf IsIdenticalTo IsReviewedBy <wbr>Reviews IsDerivedFrom
IsSourceOf
Do you disagree with my selection? </pre></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'd include IsDerivedFrom and IsSourceOf (see below).</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">These terms might be
useful to explicit the roles of various instances in the
Entity/Activity/Agent pattern <br>
in the Provenance Model. <br>
<i>isDerivedFrom</i> is a typical link name between a dataset (
entity) and its progenitor for instance.</font><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>(c) I'm not including IsDerivedFrom (which is about the same as our
derived-from) from the DataCite vocabulary since I expect that here,
the two term sets will live together for quite a while, and I don't
want to deprecate one in favour of the other. Should we? The reason
for the co-existence is that I don't think DataCite will talk about
services any time soon, and so the very important served-by
relationship may not enter DataCite for quite a while.</pre></blockquote></div></blockquote><div>Call me naive, but I would suggest that getting our needed relationships into DataCite's schema should be an achievable goal. I just noticed that version 4.0 came with some additional elements (none too interesting for us), which indicates that the working group is quite active and (based on what I observed) open to consider use cases -- after all we got bibcodes in there as a recognized identifier scheme. So I would consider it a success if we could minimize VO-specific terms in favor of Dublin Core or DataCite ones going forward. And getting our terms into those standards would be the path to it.</div><div><br></div><div>-- Alberto</div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><blockquote type="cite"><pre>
Opinions?
-- Markus
[1] Erratum: the link to the content/type vocabulary should of course
have been <a href="http://docs.g-vo.org/vocab-test/content_type" target="_blank">http://docs.g-vo.org/vocab-<wbr>test/content_type</a> in that mail.
</pre><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
</font></span></blockquote><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
--
Mireille Louys
CDS Laboratoire Icube
Observatoire de Strasbourg Telecom Physique Strasbourg
11 rue de l'Université 300, Bd Sebastien Brandt CS 10413
F- 67000-STRASBOURG F- 67412 ILLKIRCH Cedex
tel: <a href="tel:%2B33%203%2068%2085%2024%2034" value="+33368852434" target="_blank">+33 3 68 85 24 34</a></pre>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>Dr. Alberto Accomazzi<br>Principal Investigator</div><div>NASA Astrophysics Data System - <a href="http://ads.harvard.edu" target="_blank">http://ads.harvard.edu</a><br>Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics - <a href="http://www.cfa.harvard.edu" target="_blank">http://www.cfa.harvard.edu</a><br>60 Garden St, MS 83, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA</div></div></div>
</div></div>