- From: Laufer <laufer@globo.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 20:48:27 -0300
- To: Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+pXJigNTNB60yisNxEDKxSXgAvch-V4kg=BYkq6zvo2xg8sng@mail.gmail.com>
Steve, I can understand the things you've said. In a general sense, they are right (IMO). But other members of the group can disagree. What I have commented is about the use of the words abstract and instance. Examples and text explanations are many times more clear than single words. Best, Laufer Em terça-feira, 7 de julho de 2015, Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com> escreveu: > Hi Laufer, > > Thanks for this lucid explanation. I really understand you now. Let me > try to summarize what I think I am reading: > > 1. "A Dataset" is a theoretical construct, an abstract thing, like a > corporation, an entity that may or may not be comprised of organic life > forms. But certainly it is a collection of other things - documents, > locations, concepts, computers, networks, chairs, desks, maybe people. > > 2. "The Dataset" is a real thing, an entity comprised of data (columns > and rows and/or bits and bytes). > > 3. "The Dataset" may be an instance of "A Dataset" - the real thing is an > example of the theoretical construct. > > 4. "The Dataset" may be distributed to other people, computers, and even > to abstract things like corporations. > > Do I have that right? > > > Best Regards, > > Steve > > Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Again" > > [image: Inactive hide details for Laufer ---07/07/2015 02:58:52 PM---Hi, > Steve, As I commented before, the words abstract and instance]Laufer > ---07/07/2015 02:58:52 PM---Hi, Steve, As I commented before, the words > abstract and instance have different uses. > > > > From: > > > Laufer <laufer@globo.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','laufer@globo.com');>> > > To: > > > Steven Adler/Somers/IBM@IBMUS > > Cc: > > > Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','public-dwbp-wg@w3.org');>> > > Date: > > > 07/07/2015 02:58 PM > > Subject: > > > Re: reviewing the BP doc > ------------------------------ > > > > Hi, Steve, > > As I commented before, the words abstract and instance have different > uses. And I think is better to avoid its use without a clear definition. > For example, when we are talking about Object Oriented things, an instance > has a specific meaning. > > I think that the fact that the access to data from a Dataset is made > through its distributions, this does not mean that a specific Dataset is an > abstract thing. An "Organization", for example, IBM, is not an abstract > thing. But I cannot reach IBM (I don't know if I am expressing my thoughts > in a good way). I think "Organization" is an abstract thing and IBM is an > instance of "Organization". In that way, "Dataset" (the concept, the class) > is an abstract thing. But a specific Dataset, an instance of the abstract > concept "Dataset", is not. > > But people use the word instance for other things. In the same way, > abstract. The data that people can access, the data they can touch is what > DCAT calls a distribution. Is this an instance of the Dataset? In terms of > the informal use of the word instance, I think the answer is yes. But (IMO) > is not an instance when we think about OO. > > If we have an API where someone could ask for a collection from a Dataset > using a query, each of the answers will be a subset of the Dataset. Could > we say that these subsets are instances of the Dataset? > > The audience of our BP document may have technical different levels (I > guess), so I think that if we could avoid this confusion, it will be better. > > Best Regards, > Laufer > > > 2015-07-07 14:42 GMT-03:00 Steven Adler <*adler1@us.ibm.com* > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','adler1@us.ibm.com');>>: > > Laufer, > > Good discussion. Are you saying that there are instances of Datasets > that get distributed when someone downloads them? > > Dataset > > > > Best Regards, > > Steve > > Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Again" > > [image: Inactive hide details for Laufer ---06/30/2015 08:37:25 > AM---Makx, I am really confused now.]Laufer ---06/30/2015 08:37:25 > AM---Makx, I am really confused now. > > > > From: > > > Laufer <*laufer@globo.com* > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','laufer@globo.com');>> > > To: > > > Makx Dekkers <*mail@makxdekkers.com* > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mail@makxdekkers.com');>> > > Cc: > > > Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group <*public-dwbp-wg@w3.org* > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','public-dwbp-wg@w3.org');>> > > Date: > > > 06/30/2015 08:37 AM > > Subject: > > > Re: reviewing the BP doc > > ------------------------------ > > > > > Makx, > > I am really confused now. > > In what moment of this discussion I proposed to change this model? > > My participation in this post was motivated exactly because I have > identified a proposal to change that model and I expressed my opinion to > contribute. > > And, again, the word abstract was not introduced by me in this post. > And this word was the main reason for my opinion. I commented to take care > using the words abstract and instance. > > I also agree that the group don't have to change the DCAT model (we > don't have time to that), but I don't see any problem If someone in the > group identifiy things missing in that model, and we discuss and even > decide to insert a note in our document about this. > > But as all the things in the group, is a matter of proposals and > votings. > > Laufer > > > > Em terça-feira, 30 de junho de 2015, Makx Dekkers < > *mail@makxdekkers.com* > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mail@makxdekkers.com');>> escreveu: > Laufer, > > > > Let’s not use words like ‘abstract things’ because we might have > different ideas what that phrase means. > > > > What is clear is that dcat:Dataset and dcat:Distribution are > classes in the DCAT model. DCAT defines what they are and how they are > related. DCAT is also clear about how those classes relate to the physical > data files or to the endpoints that give access to the actual data. > > > > I think we should restrict the discussion to that model. If not, we > might end up developing a different model, and I am not sure that this > group really wants to go there. > > > > Makx. > > > > > > *From:* Laufer [mailto:*laufer@globo.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','laufer@globo.com');>*] > * Sent:* 29 June 2015 22:30 > * To:* Makx Dekkers > * Cc:* Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group > * Subject:* Re: reviewing the BP doc > > > > Ok, Makx. > > I know this DCAT diagram. I am comfortable with this. And in this > model, both Datasets and Distributions are not abstract things. > What it is not comfortable to me is to consider that a Dataset is > an abstract thing. > > Laufer > > > > 2015-06-29 16:04 GMT-03:00 Makx Dekkers <*mail@makxdekkers.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mail@makxdekkers.com');>*>: > > > Laufer, > > > > Ø I think we have to be carefull about using the words abstract > and instance. > > > > Agree. Let’s not use those words. > > > > Ø From the discussions, it seems to me that the Dataset is an > abstract thing with instances that are the distributions. > > Ø This is what I have understood from the posts from Bernadette > and from you. And (until now) I do not agree with this. > > > > This is **not** what I have argued. Please look at the diagram > and examples in section 4 of DCAT > *http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#vocabulary-overview* > <http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#vocabulary-overview>. That > section gives an overview of the modelling approach of DCAT. I would agree > that there are many other ways you could model this space, but DCAT is just > what it is. > > > > Makx. > > > > > > > -- > > . . . .. . . > . . . .. > . .. . > > > > > > -- > . . . .. . . > . . . .. > . .. . > > > > > > -- > . . . .. . . > . . . .. > . .. . > > -- . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. .
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: graycol.gif
- image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif
Received on Tuesday, 7 July 2015 23:48:57 UTC