Consider changing the URI of entries in the GSBPM scheme + consider renaming ActivityCategory to ActivityType

[tfrancart]

Right now we have http://id.unece.org/activities/subProcess/1.2. I suggest http://id.unece.org/activityCategories/subProcess/1.2 to be inline with the class name, and avoid confusion between prov:Activities and activity categories.

Also, I think the name ActivityCategory could be renamed to ActivityType which would be more consistent with our use of dcterms:type to relate activities to their category/type. In which case the URI of GSBPM entries should be http://id.unece.org/activityTypes/...

[tfrancart]

This also raises the question of the IRI of the ConceptScheme itself, which is right now http://id.unece.org/activities/gsbpm. i suggest http://id.unece.org/activiyCategories/gsbpm

[tfrancart]

Or even simpler, http://id.unece.org/gsbpm

[tfrancart]

Other possibilities include:

http://id.unece.org/vocabularies/gsbpm
http://id.unece.org/vocabularies/gamso

--> this naming choice would be agnostic wrt the OWL classes (no part "activities" or "activityCategories" or "activityTypes"), it coulw consistent for GSBPM and GAMSO (and potentially others), plus it would enable in the future to have dedicated browsing interface or content negostiation on the same IRI path "/vocabularies".

[tfrancart]

Related to Concepts IRI policy, a common pattern is to derive their IRI from the base ConceptScheme IRI, e.g.
http://id.unece.org/vocabularies/gsbpm/subProcess/1.2

I would also advise against putting the level (here "subProcess") in the IRI, to have a better garantee of stability over time. So:

http://id.unece.org/vocabularies/gsbpm/1.2