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

[dxwg] Conceptual model: Profile: class vs. property (#716)

From: Heidi Vanparys via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 14:52:01 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.opened-404806994-1548859920-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
heidivanparys has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/dxwg:

== Conceptual model: Profile: class vs. property ==
I have a comment regarding this part of the conceptual model:

![conceptual_model](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/11427611/51987300-13f68f80-249a-11e9-8209-76292adf7701.png)

Why is "Profile" present as a class?

I would be inclined to model this part as follows (UML-style model, as that's what I'm used to...):

![specification](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/11427611/51988974-ec092b00-249d-11e9-9668-3cf5f10e0271.png)

So

- a specification can have one or more a base specifications (that are instances of Specification)
- a specification can have one or more profiles (that are instances of Specification)

This model also implies not using dct:Standard ("A basis for comparison; a reference point against which other things can be evaluated.") at all.

The information that is currently modelled with ResourceDescriptor and its relations, couldn't that be generalized to specifications in general, and be useful?

Note: I used "specification" as that term is used in several places in the set of documents of profiles. Other place mention "standard".






Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/716 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2019 14:52:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:45:06 UTC