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

Hi Makx,

Ah, OK. In this case I guess that removing "(e.g., the ADMS profile of DCAT)" from my suggestion would lead to an acceptable sentence?

Antoine



> 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 19:49:40 UTC