- From: Jakub Klímek via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 05:45:43 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
I would too be against allowing licenses to be attached to Datasets. There is nothing stopping the publishers to link to the same description from all the distributions of their datasets, but there are definitely cases where each distribution needs its own license/rights description. An example of where different licenses/rights would definitely come into play, if you need one, is if support for Web Service distributions comes into DCAT(-AP) (there already is an approach for this in StatDCAT-AP), and LOD datasets will have one distribution as an RDF dump (free to download) and one distribution in a SPARQL endpoint, where there could be some sort of web service contract described, such as 1 query per minute or so. In this case, any inheritance of licenses or rights from Dataset to Distributions would be confusing. Yes, CKAN is not fully compatible with DCAT, even with its DCAT extension, but that can be helped. What we use in Czechia is my simple extension to CKAN which allows publishers to specify licenses at the distribution level (https://github.com/jakubklimek/ckanext-odczdataset) . We also have that extension for DKAN, another popular data catalog (https://github.com/jakubklimek/dkanext-nkod) and we are working on a native DCAT(-AP) viewer (https://github.com/linkedpipes/dcat-ap-viewer), deployed e.g. here: https://nkod.opendata.cz, which also solves some of the other issues caused by trying to have the DCAT model loaded in CKAN, such as potentially high number of distributions per dataset. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jakubklimek Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/104#issuecomment-376768751 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2018 05:46:54 UTC