@prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix this: <http://purl.org/np/RATkkK3JAexexsCXze4o0PQDmjoUoRflplOvKp5Oq9TO4> .
@prefix sub: <http://purl.org/np/RATkkK3JAexexsCXze4o0PQDmjoUoRflplOvKp5Oq9TO4#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix pav: <http://purl.org/pav/> .
@prefix np: <http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#> .
@prefix linkflows: <https://github.com/LaraHack/linkflows_model/blob/master/Linkflows.ttl#> .

sub:Head {
  this: np:hasAssertion sub:assertion;
    np:hasProvenance sub:provenance;
    np:hasPublicationInfo sub:pubinfo;
    a np:Nanopublication .
}

sub:assertion {
  sub:comment-7 a linkflows:ActionNeededComment, linkflows:ContentComment, linkflows:NegativeComment,
      linkflows:ReviewComment;
    linkflows:hasCommentText "There are suggestions to integrate some WiseNet elements in the IFC standard, but no comparison is done with the recent IFC4 ontology. It should be made more clear what are the elements that could be integrated. Furthermore, a smaller ontology is proven to be more successful this should also been taken into account.";
    linkflows:hasImpact "3"^^xsd:positiveInteger;
    linkflows:refersTo <http://purl.org/np/RAH79PlKS0afHOGuS2AxyxugfvdzGgIr1lwNeQCN7tmw8#paragraph> .
}

sub:provenance {
  sub:assertion prov:hadPrimarySource <http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/SW-180298>;
    prov:wasAttributedTo <https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9886-893X> .
}

sub:pubinfo {
  this: dc:created "2019-11-26T09:05:11+01:00"^^xsd:dateTime;
    pav:createdBy <https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7114-6459> .
}