W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > March 2016

Re: Review of BP Enable Data Subsetting

From: Deirdre Lee <deirdre@derilinx.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 11:37:18 +0000
To: public-dwbp-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <56F27FEE.9070504@derilinx.com>
Hi,

I agree that we should keep the BP on Data Subsetting.

While using an API (or SPARQL endpoint, etc. ) is a best practice for 
grabbing a subset of a larger dataset, a lot of issues people are facing 
around this topic is how to model sub-datasets in DCAT, and how to 
represent them in CKAN.

Therefore, I suggest the example section include not only an API 
example, but also an example using DataCube and DCAT.
Otherwise, we should explicitly say it's not best practice to model 
subsetting in DCAT.

Cheers,
Deirdre

On 23/03/2016 03:23, Laufer wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Considering that we have a BP "Provide bulk download", it makes sense 
> to also have a BP about providing "subset download".
>
> My comment is about the "Possible Approach of Implementation" that I 
> think is too narrow, talking only about an API as a way of access to 
> subsets.
>
> I think it would be nice to talk about URI Templates (RFC6570), Linked 
> Data API [2] and even about a SPARQL endpoint as possible 
> approaches of implementations for accessing  subsets.
>
> Cheers, Laufer
>
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570
>
> [2] http://www.epimorphics.com/web/projects/linked-data-api
>
> -- 
>
> .  .  .  .. .  .
> .        .   . ..
> .     ..       .
>

-- 
------------------------------------
Deirdre Lee, CEO & Founder
Derilinx - Linked & Open Data Solutions
  
Web:      www.derilinx.com
Email:    deirdre@derilinx.com
Address:  11/12 Baggot Court, Dublin 2, D02 F891
Tel:      +353 (0)1 254 4316
Mob:      +353 (0)87 417 2318
Linkedin: ie.linkedin.com/in/leedeirdre/
Twitter:  @deirdrelee
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2016 11:38:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 23 March 2016 11:38:04 UTC