 |
 |
Simon says: > I tend to agree with the sense of what Stu is saying here. > For the (Agent) elements, people seem to want to know the > type of the thing (party, process) which is the agent. > The concept is not new in discussions around qDC and the DC datamodel, > it was just a bit alarming the way it was introduced here, complete > with new tokens, in a kind of fait-accompli data-model in the context > of the qualifier voting form! Semantically, Object-Type is exactly the same as the Agent Type qualifier with its associated vocab list (DCAT1). In fact, the Type vocab list (DCT1) could also be considered as an "Object-Type" list. Cheers...Renato <http://purl.net/net/renato> Principal Research Scientist, DSTC <http://www.dstc.edu.au> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%