- From: Andrea Perego via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 00:22:15 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@dr-shorthair said: > OK - so is dctype:Service enough? Or do we need a model in DCAT. If you want to make dct:type and dct:conformsTo core, do we want to make a new class? or just go with SHACL after the fact? IMO, `dctype:Service` + `dct:type` + `dct:conformsTo` is the most satisfactory solution currently implemented, not requiring changes in DCAT. But I think it is worth considering also the possibility of having more specific classes than `dctype:Service` and `dcat:Distribution`. In such a case, it may be worth provide guidance on how to ensure backward compatibility. -- GitHub Notification of comment by andrea-perego Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/166#issuecomment-375830902 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 24 March 2018 00:22:19 UTC