- From: makxdekkers via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 10:54:32 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@dr-shorthair I think you are complicating the issue more than necessary. Your explanation that things that are not representations of the dataset are representations of something else got my head spinning. You are using the notion of 'representation' which is already used in the revision (both the current version and 2PWD) and suggested as a synonym of distribution - but I think that term is confusing. For example the definition of `dcat:Distribution` now states: "_represents an accessible form or representation of a dataset ..._" so it "represents ... a representation". Not helpful. I think a `dcat:Distribution` is just "_represents an accessible form of a dataset ..._". Is there really a need to make it more complicated by creating a new class `dcat:Representation`? In your example, the two images can be modelled as `foaf:Document` with `dct:type` Image, and the third one could be modelled as an `adms:Asset` with `dct:type` http://purl.org/adms/assettype/DomainModel and one or more adms:AssetDistributions. -- GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/317#issuecomment-460205238 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 4 February 2019 10:54:34 UTC