- From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2019 21:58:52 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
This issue has gone a bit wild... but if we can all agree that: - the "convention for finding how to validate data against a profile" would be that consumers of PROF profile metadata would seek to access the Resources with role "validation" and try to make sense of them - that making sense of them cannot be specified further because there too many validation models/languages that could be used (btw for me a "validation resource" could be actually a set of human-targeted instructions...) Then I think I'd be happy with that :-) There could be some language in the spec about how users of a profile could look at the validation resources attached to related/"ancestor" profiles (i.e. in a `prof:isProfileOf` relationship), if this could bring them some useful validation resources. But we should also be very cautious here. I.e., there can be models/languages (say, OWL) that allow to re-use specifications across different levels of specifications built on top of each other. But then the re-use of the validation resources could be specified at the level of the resources (say, with owl:imports) without needing to see what's available around the `prof:isProfileOf` hierarchy. -- GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/698#issuecomment-529245518 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 8 September 2019 21:58:53 UTC