W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > December 2018

Re: [dxwg] Dcat issue53 riccardo (#614)

From: makxdekkers via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2018 18:37:43 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-444594450-1544035061-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The new text states: "_The need to clearly distinguish between primary and legacy identifiers for a dataset has been identified as a requirement to be satisfied in the revision of DCAT_". 
I am not entirely in agreement with that.
I would say that, yes, there is a need for such a distinction in particular cases, i.e. in harvesting environments where descriptions are copied among catalogues. This case is mentioned in the last sentence of the section: "_Depending on the application context, specific guidelines such as "DCAT-AP: How to manage duplicates?" can be adopted for distinguishing authoritative datasets from dataset harvested by third parties catalogs_".
In my mind, the notion of primary and secondary (not **_legacy_**, I think) identifiers depends very much on the application environment. This requirement could be satisfied in a profile (as it is done on the EU DCAT-AP) and not in the base standard.

GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/614#issuecomment-444594450 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2018 18:38:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:45:05 UTC