Re: [dxwg] How to express distributions provided as compressed files

@dr-shorthair A note to your comment in the email summary of the issue:
> If the content is simple then the “+zip” strategy on the media-type designator is OK

I disagree. 
1. Some media types already have an extension, e.g. `application/ld+json` and a media type cannot have 2 extensions
2. The `+zip` media type extension indicates the ZIP technique (`application/zip`), which is only one of many
3. It would be an extra place to look for information about compression.
4. What is a simple content and what is a complex content?

> This is a potential rabbit hole, too many layers is impractical 

Sure, too many layers are impractical, but I was proposing a quite simple solution to common (not all) situations, i.e. compressed file, packaged homogeneous files, and their combination. This also covers a compressed file with a standardized directory structure such as a Data Package.

@arminhaller Regarding your point in the minutes:
> What about a compressed file that contains ttl, n3 and rdf/xml files that are all equivalent

These should be 3 `dcat:Distribution`s, e.g. one for `.ttl.gz`, one for `.nt.gz` and one for `.rdf.gz`.

@andrea-perego Regarding your point in the minutes:
> for standard nested formats we don't need to do anything

We still need the proposed extension for the common situations.

> if nesting is done in an arbitrary way, a readme file within the structure should be used

Primary focus should be on machine readability. In cases something non-standard is used as a distribution, it should be in case where no standard DCAT ways are applicable and this should be documented in the datasets description and documentation.


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by jakubklimek
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/259#issuecomment-400994402 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 28 June 2018 10:48:25 UTC