W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-comments@w3.org > April 2012

Re: Vocabulary alignment

From: Simon Reinhardt <simon.reinhardt@koeln.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:43:22 +0200
Message-ID: <4F85B4AA.2030506@koeln.de>
To: "Maali, Fadi" <fadi.maali@deri.org>
CC: public-gld-comments@w3.org
Hi Fadi,

I see. It seems a bit unfortunate that void:Dataset was defined so strictly. Maybe it should be a sub-type of dcat:Dataset then.

I wonder if http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Dataset would be appropriate for mapping.

Anyway, happy with all the comments, thanks! :-)

Regards,
   Simon

Maali, Fadi wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Thanks for your comments. regarding the DCAT part:
>
>>  I also see some other potential mappings or opportunities for re-use:
> dcat:Dataset could
>>  be a sub-class or replaced with void:Dataset [5].
>
> dcat:Dataset can't be a subclass of void:Dataset because it is a more
> general concept.
> void:Dataset represents an RDF dataset while dcat:Dataset captures any
> dataset.
> Consideration of other possible mappings (e.g. to dcat:Distribution) are
> also possible
> see [7] for an initial discussion. Mapping the two vocabularies is
> definitely worth
> thinking of however I believe deferring the decsion until dcat is used
> more in the
> wild and usecases become clearer is better for now.
>
> Regards,
> Fadi
>
> [1] https://plus.google.com/102497386507936526460/posts/Xswyq5GxdvL
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/
> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-people/
> [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/
> [5] http://www.w3.org/TR/void/
> [6] http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/
> [7] http://code.google.com/p/void-impl/issues/detail?id=63
>
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 16:44:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 11 April 2012 16:44:03 GMT