Review Comment:
This paper presents a long term research work about using ontology and semantic data in History.
In the first part, the authors presents the Symogih conceptual model for history, with objects and knowledge units (KU).
Objects are "objective facts" and KU enable users to describe knowledge about such objects according to specific points of view. In particular, KU can be used to describe information extracted from sources such as documents.
Hence, knowledge units can be seen as viewpoints on objects.
The authors compare their approach with the Factoid model which is another model used in history. They also compare their approcah with the CIDOC CRM model for museum, the top level DOLCE ontology and the Descriptions and situations ontology.
In a second part, the authors present the Data for History consortium and the OntoME software environment to manage ontologies in history domain.
The tool includes the CDOC CRM model as well as other models such as Opentheso.
The tool provides features to perform alignment among models. It also provides features to extend existing models to adapt them for history.
This is part of ongoing work in the history domain to provide an ecosystem for ontologies and semantic data.
Details
You may write a sentence to explain why the OntoME system relies on a SQL database instead of a triple store.
"This relevant but complex issue will be discussed in this paper as it is not its focus."
->
will *not* be discussed (?)
perspecive -> perspective
ridiscribed -> rediscribed (two occurrences)
relathionships -> relationships
the union of a *men* and a woman -> man
would become blurred and be *depent* on the research agenda
->
dependent (?)
"allow experts to directly inspect namespaces in Protégé"
->
Explain in one sentence what "inspect namespaces" means. In the Semantic Web a namespace is an URI...
"reference namespaces control"
->
same remark as above
A dashboard allows to filter
->
A dashboard allows *someone* to filter
Users have different *editings* rights
->
editing
| 
