- From: kcoyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 13:58:08 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
prof:ResourceDescription is not the same as dcat:Distribution, so copying that model isn't appropriate. dcat:Distribution is "A specific representation of a dataset." The graph describes a single "thing". prof:ResourceDescription is a relationship between two entities due to the use of the role, which is relative. The role is also not an attribute of the artifact, which confirms its semantics as a relationship between a profile and a "thing" that has its own existence. Also, there is no "one-to-one" defined between prof:ResourceDescription and the artifact, AFAIK, and we have already established that an artifact can be defined with more than one role, which is unlike dcat:Distribution. I'd have to think more about dcat:Distribution in this regard because that usage of dct:format may also be questionable. As for "elsewhere" - I don't think you can control this. It's an open web and you may be using resources controlled by others. That will definitely be the case in the library world. The "open world assumption" applies here and nothing so far in the vocabulary would prevent use of any artifact found on the web. An implementation may do so, but the deliverable here is for a vocabulary, not an implementation. An implementation would be a good use case for a profile (with constraints) of PROF. -- GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/769#issuecomment-466404671 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 22 February 2019 13:58:09 UTC