W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > June 2015

Re: reviewing the BP doc

From: Laufer <laufer@globo.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 17:30:16 -0300
Message-ID: <CA+pXJihJXrVYToiCYxekTGFm12s00gmkSO3ikJpkf24Y93hOLw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>
Cc: Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
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>:

> 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. 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.
>



-- 
.  .  .  .. .  .
.        .   . ..
.     ..       .
Received on Monday, 29 June 2015 20:30:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 June 2015 20:30:48 UTC