- From: Simon Cox via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 22:56:33 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Thanks @makxdekkers indeed that helps in that it lays out some of the issues and options, though I don't think it fully resolves it. The geospatial metadata community wants to have an identifier for the dataset-metadata-record distinct from the identifier for the dataset, because they are managed and versioned separately. In a DCAT context that means that a `dcat:CatalogRecord` comes into play, since it is explicitly related to the lifecycle of the `dcat:Dataset` description. Conceptually that much is clear, and the separation of concerns in DCAT matches standard registry models. However, I'm not sure that either the URI of the `dcat:CatalogRecord` or the URI of the `dcat:Dataset` identifies the _RDF graph_ that is the actual dataset description. Maybe the full story requires us to step up to 'named graphs'? I realise I'm making fine distinctions here, and it has echoes of the notorious Range-14 discussion from >10 years ago. Most of the web has moved on from that, -- GitHub Notification of comment by dr-shorthair Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/771#issuecomment-467218342 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 25 February 2019 22:56:34 UTC