Mappings from DPV to other vocabularies
This issue is intended to create a list identifying the vocabularies whose mappings should be provided by the DPVCG.
Given that DPV takes a singularly domain-specific approach to defining terms (i.e. it does not consider semantics from other vocabularies), its use alongside or with other vocabularies is undefined. For example, dpv:hasName is semantically similar to foaf:name or rdfs:label. When an use-case or adopter requires use of other vocabularies, it is desirable to have an alignment between DPV and other vocabularies so as to have a data model/graph utilising both.
The proposal is to provide such mappings in a directory e.g. /mappings/dpv-foaf containing an RDF file representing the mapping which is expressed using SKOS (i.e. exact, close, related) and a HTML document explaining the rationale and implications.
Below are vocabularies proposed for producing mappings (section below is edited to keep the list updated)
- RDFS (labels, comments) and SKOS (labels, notes) - note: DPV prefers use of SKOS annotations
- foaf - annotations for agents / entities
- vCard - annotations for agents / entities
- DCMI Metadata Terms - relations for commonly utilised information e.g. timestamps, publication provenance, identifiers
- ODRL - legal/deontic terms e.g. parties (entities in DPV) and rules regarding permissions - aligned with DPV's taxonomy e.g. personal data, purpose, legal basis
- SEMIC - EU SEMIC vocabularies such as DCAT-AP, Core, ADMS used for open data
- PROV - activities, aretefacts, agents/entities, and expressing plans/provenance
- gist - upper ontology for business processes and concepts
- schema.org - broad coverage of terms representing entities, processes, for communications (e.g. emails), kinds of personal data
- DCAT - resources, provenance of resources, representing data and catalogues
Can you also include the core vocabularies for SEMIC?
E.g. dpv:LegalEntity has a different definition than https://semiceu.github.io/Core-Business-Vocabulary/releases/2.00/#Legal%20Entity.
Is there any relationship with DCAT?
Hi. For SEMIC, of course - it would be nice to do that. In principle, we're open to supporting any mapping. The only limiting factor is availability of volunteers/contributors. If you or anyone else is willing to lead a particular mapping, please let me/us know and we can see how to best move ahead. Otherwise, it'll be on the list after the common vocabularies (FOAF, vCard, etc.).
For DCAT, yes - there will be a proposal soon. Right now its in work-in-progress E.g. see https://harshp.com/research/publications/047-data-processing-activities-catalog for the general idea.
Copying @clange asking about mapping to ODRL in dpvcg/dpv#11 - which is in scope of this issue.
Thoughts on how to approach this:
- output should be a folder
/mappingsthat contains RDF and HTML docs - output should enable two kinds of views: (i) for each dpv concept show what external concepts are relevant, and (ii) for each specific external vocab show relevant DPV concepts
- mappings can be optionally in RDF (how to express these? Is there a mapping ontology?), otherwise for simplicity just create a spreadsheet and use that to populate the HTML docs
Link to DPVCG work on aligning DPV and ODRL: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dpvcg/2022Oct/0006.html
Is there some (free?) tool that can be used to create/maintain the SKOS mappings? (doing it by hand is tiresome!)