JuergenGrupp
JuergenGrupp
I have 3 improvements to this pull request: 1) I think I have spotted an error in our renaming plan of `applyTo`: `applyTo` is currently only used here: Rights `applyTo`...
Editorial Committee, May 5: agreed.
Following our new naming conventions, I will split the properties into: `Award` `isAwardedTo` `Agent` `Agent` `isAwardedWith` `Award`
Another improvement for disambiguation: instead of `isAwardedWith` I will use `holdsAward`
And another improvement: `holdsAward` **is the inverse of** `isAwardedTo`
EditorialCommittee, May 6: should we rather use: isHeldBy instead of isAwardedTo? This opens the question, whether the naming should support building of SPARQL-requests or should it mainly support easy understanding....
Good observation! We have not had the time yet to update the dcterms:description when we added skos:definition and skos:example. So in quite a few cases apart from `Role` the dcterms:description...
Editorial Committee: The properties are only annotations, so the standard does not change, when they are changed or even removed. Whenever we have a skos:definition and the dcterms:description does not...
The class Role has been replaced by the class Involvement. The meaning of Involvement is clearly defined and consistent. Only some of the annotations, like dcterms:description still use the "Role"....
This issue is not fully covered by #299. There we are correcting the IRIs. Here we need to correct the labels. We agreed on May 6 to correct the labels...