- From: Fadi Maali <fadi.maali@deri.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:27:37 +0100
- To: Stasinos Konstantopoulos <konstant@iit.demokritos.gr>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Cc: GLD Public Comments <public-gld-comments@w3.org>
Hi, Thanks for the feedback on DCAT! I want to let you know that I have changed the text in DCAT Spec as suggested by Phil see for example: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/dcat/index.html#Property:dataset_release_date Best regards, Fadi On 5 Apr 2013, at 08:33, Stasinos Konstantopoulos <konstant@iit.demokritos.gr> wrote: > Dear Phil, GLDers, > > kind reminder of some thoughts I had posted earlier, regarding ways to > compromise between current (mal)practice and accurate ways to express "I > don't know exactly when". > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2012Jan/0094.html > > best, > s > > > On Thu Apr 4 10:16:49 2013 Phil Archer said: > >> Having noted this afternoon's agenda item on ADMS I'm working on >> that document right now which is causing me to look at DCAT more >> carefully than I have of late - which is my excuse for just noticing >> something I should have seen before. I ask that the WG treats this >> as a last call comment. >> >> In the text related to the use of dcterms:issued [1] we say: >> >> "rdfs:Literal typed as xsd:date. The date is encoded as a literal in >> "YYYY-MM-DD" form (ISO 8601 Date and Time Formats). If the specific >> day or month are not known, then 01 should be specified." >> >> I remember raising this at our previous f2f last year as I find it >> objectionable that we actively encourage sloppy practice and >> inaccurate data. >> >> If I know that something was issued in March 2013 then I can write >> >> dcterms:issued "2013-03"^^xsd:gYearMonth >> >> That conveys exactly what I mean - that the thing was issued at some >> point between 2013-03-01T00:00:00 and 2013-03-31T23:59:59. But I >> don't know when. It is accurate, if not precise. >> >> But DCAT says we shouldn't do this. We should render it as >> 2013-03-01 which means that the thing was issued sometime in the 24 >> hour period known as 1st March. That may be wrong by as much as 30 >> days and gives an entirely bogus impression of accuracy. >> >> I suspect that the reason for this is that catalogues habitually >> don't understand xsd:gYearMonth. If that's the case then that's >> application-specific and a profile may wish to make it clear that >> dates must be xsd:date only, even if that means it will create >> inaccuracies where none exist in the original data, but IMHO this >> sloppiness should not be included in the DCAT spec. Therefore I >> suggest that the text for this property says: >> >> "rdfs:Literal using the relevant ISO 8601 Date and Time compliant >> string and typed using the appropriate XML Schema datatype >> [[XMLSCHEMA-2]]" >> >> >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#Property:catalog_release_date >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Phil Archer >> W3C eGovernment >> http://www.w3.org/egov/ >> >> http://philarcher.org >> +44 (0)7887 767755 >> @philarcher1 >
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2013 13:28:07 UTC