Review Comment:
I have seen the author's response and new version, and acknowledge a significant improvement in the work. Most of my questions were answered satisfactorily, and I find the paper much clearer than in its previous version.
I have very minor comments relating the form (typos&minor), which should be easily addressed:
- page 1 : "There is no universally accepted definition for data analytics process" >> There is no universally accepted definition for the process of data analytics
- Data Analytics Solution (DAS) that capture >> Data Analytics Solution (DAS) that captures
- The process that represents data analytics solution is related to the discipline of data science. >> I would remove this, the previous & following sentences are connected already
- Also be consistent, DAS Engineering or DAS engineering? (I would go for the second)
- there is no one model that works best for every problem >> there is not a model working best for every problem
- page 2 : when you say "There has been many recent efforts" could you provide any evidence (e.g. increasing publications perhaps?)?
- page 3 : Abello et. al [7] study is specially about using semantic web technologies >> "In particular, Abello et. al [7] studies the use of sw technologies [...], while Ristoski ...
- page 3, section 3 : "As our objective was to provide an overview of how semantic technology is used in DAS engineering" >> As our objective is [...] in DAS engineering ,
- page 4, section 3.6 : question 1 and 2- >> question 1 and 2, i.e. ...
- page 4, section 3.6 : classification schema in top-down fashion >> classification schema in a top-down fashion,
- page 4, section 3.6 : concepts respectively . The third one - "Metadata Ontologies" >> concepts respectively. The third one, i.e. (or called) "Metadata Ontologies"
- following sentence : is very high-level and vague we >> is very high-level and vague, we
- page 5, section 3.6 : DAS related tasks >> DAS-related tasks
- and further down : enterprise oriented >> enterprise-oriented
- section 3.6 last par : from *the* 82 identified studies ... the tasks proposed in *the* 82 studies ...
- page 5, Fig 1 : " Identified Tasks from Literature" >> Identified Tasks from the literature. (with a final dot!) You might also want to specify the meaning of the arrow (and whether there is a parallel between 1-5 and 6-9 )
- section 4.2.1 "domain specific knowledge" > "domain-specific knowldge"
- 4.2.2. : [S22,S27,S35,S66] >> [S22, S27, S35, S66]
- Table 1 & 2 : the captions should be on the same line of the name of the table, did you add an extra \\ ? There is also something funny with the borders of your multicolumns, probably too many pipes | ?
- Figure 2 : Add a dot at the end of the caption! The time analysis is quite interesting, do the authors have any explanation for the spike of 2014&2015 (maybe extend your thought before 4.3.1?)?
- page 15 : OntoKDD S60 and OntoDM S79 >> OntoKDD (S60) and OntoDM (S79),
- page 6, when you mention the web of science database, I assume it is : http://apps.webofknowledge.com ? (please refer)
|