We reviewed the W3C PROV Model Primer. The prov:wasRevisionOf predicate seemed like a good fit for the concept of a history predecessor. We discussed whether we should use both that predicate and dcterms:replaces. The feeling was that dcterms:replaces is a more generalized usage that might be used when a resource becomes obsolete and is replaced by a different concept resource. For that reason, the suggestion was that we solely use prov:wasRevisionOf to represent history predecessor. The The W3C PROV Ontology does not anything about cardinality. There was agreement that a versioned resource might have zero, one, or many prov:wassRevisionOf statements. Zero would apply to the first version in the history as it has no predecessor. One occurrence would apply to typical sequential revisions. Two or more occurrences might apply when parallel revisions are merged.
We discussed dcterms:isVersionOf. The W3C PROV Model Primer does not seem to discuss the notion of concept resources, so dcterms:isVersionOf is a good fit to represent a version resource and its base concept resource.
We discussed prov:used. This doesn’t seem that relevant to the CM workgroup, and it appears to overlap the existing dcterms:references predicate.
We discussed baselines and configurations. In some domains, a baseline may be constructed over time. While the baseline is being prepared, the baseline itself is mutable, but the resources it references are immutable. It is not clear whether baselines should be a different type of resource than configurations. Baselines may undergo a lifecycle that includes an approval process before the baseline resource itself becomes an unchangeable collection of versioned resources.
