RE: Resolving DCAT/ADMS Versioning (was Re: Naive question on DCAT versioning)

Antoine,

The statement that ADMS prescribes the creation of a new Asset for any
change is not true. As I wrote before, it depends on your perspective
and the type of Asset/Dataset that you're looking at.

Makx.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antoine Isaac [mailto:aisaac@few.vu.nl]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 5:00 PM
> To: Fadi Maali
> Cc: Chris Beer; Phil Archer; Richard Cyganiak; Ghislain Atemezing;
> Public GLD WG
> Subject: Re: Resolving DCAT/ADMS Versioning (was Re: Naive question on
> DCAT versioning)
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Despite the discusison, I think the proposed addition do make the
> situation clearer.
> 
> Perhaps one can clarify by adding something like this for the note on
> dcterms:modified:
> 
> "The use of this term implies that a change has been made to the
> dataset. Note that in some situations (e.g., the ADMS profile of DCAT)
> the use of this term will be prescribed by the approach to versioning,
> which may go as far as requiring any dataset change to lead to the
> creation of a new version of the dataset, identified by a specific
> URI."
> 
> Best,
> 
> Antoine
> 
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > DCAT doesn't have a concept of versioning. It is left to the
> publisher to decide whether a modification to a dataset is considered
> a new version or not.
> > Therefore, dct:modified can be used in case the publisher chooses
> not to support versions. dct:modified is also needed  in case the data
> is modified since it was created however the catalog only lists the
> latest version of the dataset.
> >
> > I suggest we add only the first text suggested by Phil to Section 4
> (Vocabulary Overview):
> >
> > "DCAT does not have a prescribed concept of versioning. It is up to
> the implementer whether a modification creates a new dataset or is
> simply a more recently modified version of the same dataset. A
> versioning mechanism is defined for ADMS which is a profile of DCAT."
> >
> > Regards,
> > Fadi
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > Fadi Maali
> > PhD student @ Insight Galway (formerly DERI)
> > Irish Research Council Embark Scholarship holder
> > http://www.deri.ie/users/fadi-maali
> >
> > On 30 Oct 2013, at 15:46, Chris Beer <chris@codex.net.au> wrote:
> >
> >> All
> >>
> >> Prehaps we need to define what we mean by version in order
> sucessfully conclude the discussion? (My previous +1 stands in that I
> feel the rewrite as proposed makes more sense than the original.)
> >>
> >> Richard does raise a valid point - when does a change stop being an
> "edit" a.k.a modification, and start being a new version. Is it enough
> as Ghislain says to make any change at all a change event and use prov
> to detail the change and extent?
> >>
> >> (By the same token, a new version may not necessarily be a
> modification in practice but only in the metadata - for instance a
> document (or dataset) going from draft to final without modification
> other than the doc review status which is metadata.)
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Chris Beer
> >> Australia
> >>
> >> Sent from my Sony XperiaT smartphone
> >>
> >> ---- Richard Cyganiak wrote ----
> >>
> >>> Phil,
> >>>
> >>> The two proposed amendments appear to contradict each other. The
> first one says that DCAT doesn't prescribe a particular notion of
> versioning. I agree. The second one says that the use of :modified
> indicates a change that was small enough not to require a new version.
> This implies that certain changes would require a new version of a
> dataset and hence would require something that DCAT cannot provide. I
> disagree with that, and it contradicts the earlier statement. It also
> seems to imply that a new version is not a modification, which I find
> bizarre.
> >>>
> >>> Richard
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 29 Oct 2013, at 18:54, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear all,
> >>>>
> >>>> There was an active discussion on 31st July this year prompted by
> a question Antoine raised with me. It was not actually resolved
> however and so I am trying to do that here. I've re-read through the
> thread and believe that no substantive changes are necessary, however,
> two editorial changes would be useful as follows.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> In Section 4, Vocabulary Overview, the paragraph that begins
> "Notice that a dataset in DCAT is defined as... " should be appended
> with:
> >>>>
> >>>> "DCAT does not have a prescribed concept of versioning. It is up
> to the implementer whether a modification creates a new dataset or is
> simply a more recently modified version of the same dataset. A
> versioning mechanism is defined for ADMS which is a profile of DCAT."
> >>>>
> >>>> I think the definition and usage note for dcat:Dataset is correct
> as is, however, the usage note for dct:modified, which currently reads
> "The value of this property indicates a change to the actual dataset,
> not a change to the catalog record. An absent value may indicate that
> the dataset has never changed after its initial publication, or that
> the date of last modification is not known, or that the dataset is
> continuously updated."
> >>>>
> >>>> should be appended with:
> >>>>
> >>>> "The use of this term implies that a change has been made but
> that this is not sufficient to have created a new version of the
> dataset. New versions of a dataset should be identified and cataloged
> separately."
> >>>>
> >>>> These changes, I hope, clarify that DCAT does not have a concept
> of versioning, that ADMS does, and that whether a modification does or
> does not create a new version is application-specific. The essential
> semantics, however, are unchanged.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thoughts?
> >>>>
> >>>> Phil.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 31/07/2013 19:45, Ghislain Atemezing wrote:
> >>>>> Dear Antoine,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sorry if I missed your point in my previous mail...
> >>>>>> @Ghislain: I'm not sure I understand your point: "as far as it
> is reflected in the metadata, such as dct:modified" seems to hint that
> you're just updating an existing instance of dcat:Dataset. But my
> point is about when there is a *new resource* of dcat:Dataset, as
> explained above.
> >>>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#Class:_Dataset does not say
> anything about whether such treatment is allowed or discouraged in
> DCAT. And thus if ADMS is compliant with DCAT or not.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Now that I read the entire thread with Makx, I understand better
> your point. And I agree there is nothing at the moment in DCAT to
> handle that issue properly.
> >>>>> I wonder if this issue of versioning affects only DCAT. Maybe
> one solution could be to help the user by clarifying it somewhere in
> the spec; or maybe handling it like in the ORG vocabulary [1] by
> creation
> >>>>> a dcat:DataSetEvent by linking to PROV-O vocabulary (e.g: with
> prov:wasDerivedFrom property).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>> Ghislain
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/#org:ChangeEvent
> >>>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#wasDerivedFrom
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>> Phil Archer
> >>>> W3C eGovernment
> >>>>
> >>>> http://philarcher.org
> >>>> +44 (0)7887 767755
> >>>> @philarcher1
> >>>>
> >>>
> >

Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2013 16:48:34 UTC