The result of using specific body types, and eliminating the general "body," is that no annotations can be created unless the needed type has already been defined. This is an obvious barrier to innovation, and is the situation we find ourselves in now with MARC.
So, in fact, there is no formal "Body" defined. (There is the concept of a Body, defined to be the aggregate of triples corresponding to properties defined for that Annotation class, but there is no property hasBody formally defined.)
On the other hand though, the concept of Target remains the same, and is still the same concept as an OA Target. So, you could legitimately argue that
bf:annotates -> subPropertyOf -> oa:hasTarget
still makes sense, I suppose. Does it really though, with all the other differences?
-- Karen Coyle [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet