Questions and/or improvement sugestions for Best Practises

[JALinnerud]

Questions_and_or_improvement_suggestionst.docx

[tfrancart]

http://rdf.insee.fr/def/base# : This resource requires access permissions. Should it be easier to access/removed from this document?

INSEE looks into this currently, it will be accessible

http://data.europa.eu/eli/ontology# Could a better URI be found? This one results in a rdf document. Perhaps https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli-register/about.html?

This is a namespace URI. It is correct. The URL .../about.html is already given in the footnote

http://www.w3.org/ns/prov# Would it be more precise to use https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/ in accordance with the description or change the description to The PROV Namespace in accordance with the URI?

No. Again, similar to ELI, this is a namespace URI, not a link to a documentation page. This is the correct namespace of the PROV ontology:

“ESCO, that stands for European Skills Competencies, qualifications and Occupations, is linked to the ISCO classification, one occupation of ESCO corresponds to only one poste of ISCO.”

I wonder what “poste” would correspond to in English in this context, occupation, unit group? Unit group is mentioned twice in this section, but I am unsure what it means.

Renamed "poste" to "item"

“Since its creation, the NAF has been revised twice.”
Should the acronym “NAF” be expanded the first time it is used or at least explained ie French classification of activities?

Yes, added : "... Since its creation, the NAF (Nomenclature d'Activités Française - French classification of activities)"

xkos:numberOfLevels : Would it be better to replace “imbricated” by “nested”?

Yes, done.

G.5.3 Type classification items according to a branch or a subset of items
“The pattern described above of declaring an OWL class corresponding to the skos:ConceptScheme can be applied, but for the skos:ConceptScheme corresponding to a "partition".”
The use of “but” here without any further explanation is unclear, rewrite?

Rewrote as "...can be applied, this time with a skos:ConceptScheme corresponding to a "partition"..."

“§7 of the XKOS specification introduces xkos:Correspondence and xkos:ConceptAssociation, amongst other terms, to model correspondences, conversion tables, mapping, concordance tables.”
Consider removing “conversion tables” and “concordance tables”. They only appear once in this document and might cause confusion.

No. We want to keep all appellations. I just put "mappings" in plurals.

L.1 Informative references
“[INSEE] Ontology of Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques (France). Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques. URL: http://rdf.insee.fr/def/base#»
Both of these links are inaccessible. Improve accessibility or remove?

Same remark as the first one. INSEE is working on it, this should be accessible soon.

Thanks !