W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > January 2019

[dxwg] Remove prof:BaseSpecification (#641)

From: Andrea Perego via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2019 23:49:07 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.opened-396695181-1546904946-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
andrea-perego has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/dxwg:

== Remove prof:BaseSpecification ==
This issue has been already raised in https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/404#issuecomment-438253648 , and partially discussed while preparing the ESWC paper.

The [definition](https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/profilesont/#Class:BaseSpecification) of this class is as follows:

> A specification that defines all implementation constraints, without applying constraints on usage of another specification

IMO, this is an abstract scenario (is there any spec not using somehow another one?). And it is also said in the usage note:

> This may not be a useful class: documents of any specification can be regarded as a trivial profile, so applications only need to be concerned with Profile conformance.

Moreover, its use in the PROF spec may lead to confusion. E.g.:
- The definition above implies that `prof:BaseSpecification`, but then it is defined as a subclass of `prof:Profile` (a particular type of profile with an empty set of constraints)
- In [Figure 3](https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/profilesont/#fig-eg-dcat), DCAT is said to be a `prof:BaseSpecification`. Is this correct, considering that DCAT re-uses classes and properties from other vocabularies?

Based on the considerations above, I would be in favour of dropping `prof:BaseSpecification` from PROF.

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/641 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 7 January 2019 23:49:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:45:05 UTC