Kai Eckert wrote:
> > Dear Thomas.
> > I have just pushed the edits from your reviews (both parts). You can
> > find a detailed response here:
> > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Tom_Baker
> > The version with your edits:
> > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/51a664e72cf6/dc-note/releases/NOTE-prov-dc-20130430/Overview.html

Very good - thank you!

> From Tom:
> >         ======================================================================
> >         1. Status of the Turtle representations and the subclasses they
> >         declare
> 
> I raised an issue [1] about the namespace of the DC-PROV extensions. My
> opinion is that if they use the general PROV namespace, they have to be
> included into the document that is delivered when the namespace is
> dereferenced. 

I would agree with that position.

> If this document is supposed to be PROV-O and only PROV-O,
> then we should use another namespace, we could even suggest to put it
> under the control of DCMI, i.e., use the dc-namespace.
> 
> @Tom: Would that be an option for Dublin Core? Something like
> purl.org/dc/prov/?

I'm torn about this issue.  We could not do this in the short term without
clarifying some much larger policy issues.  For the longer term, we should
definitely have a discussion about how DCMI might do this.

Tom

-- 
Tom Baker <[log in to unmask]>

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the DC-PROVENANCE list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=DC-PROVENANCE&A=1