W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-wg@w3.org > January 2012

Re: ISSUE-5 (Frequency): Implications of the domain of dcterms:accrualPeriodicity

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 12:10:57 +0000
Message-Id: <BD18494F-8038-4AF8-A45A-1583BAD11A74@cyganiak.de>
To: Government Linked Data Working Group WG <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
On 6 Jan 2012, at 17:00, Government Linked Data Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> DCAT uses dcterms:accrualPeriodicity for its frequency property which has a domain of dcterms:Collection. As already noted in the original text, this implies that a dcat:Catalog must also be a dcterms:Collection. That seems fair enough to me but raises two questions in my mind:
> 
> 1. Should we explicitly define dcat:Catalog as a sub class of dcterms:Collection? (DC states: "A collection is described as a group; its parts may also be separately described.").

I don't think that explicitly stating it makes anything clearer, so I'd omit it.

> 2. The DCAT term frequency (dcterms:accrualPeriodicity) is used as a property of dcat:Dataset (not catalog) so is dcat:dataset also a dcterms:Collection? Again, that seems to fit without any problem so should we define it as a sub class? 

Again, it's implicitly true but nothing is really gained by drawing attention to it.

> 3. If the answer to 2 is yes, is dcat:Dataset a sub class of dcat:Catalog?

No. This doesn't follow. Most datasets are not dcat:Catalogs.

Best,
Richard
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 12:11:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 25 June 2013 15:04:56 UTC