- From: Simon Cox via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 01:13:59 +0000
- To: public-sdwig@w3.org
Indeed - generic DCAT is not the place for hair-splitting. There are many special and not-so special cases that cannot be handled by the proposed predicates (e.g. differing vertical and horizontal resolutions are almost ubiquitous). But we want to provide a basic solution that is good enough for 80%, simple enough to not alienate non-spatial/temporal practitioners, but without being meaningless. A rule-of-thumb is to avoid nesting structures until you have to. So, indeed, DQV would be the next step, but these were deemed good enough for now. I think I understand the point you are making about temporal, but again I'm not sure its really in scope for DCAT. The primary use-case is discovery. Temporal Coverage tells you which time interval the dataset relates to. Temporal Resolution tells you what the temporal granularity of points in the dataset are, so you can quickly judge if it might be fit for your purpose. Yeah, the interval might not be an integer multiple of the granules, but that's not really the issue. Or am I missing your point? -- GitHub Notification of comment by dr-shorthair Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1123#issuecomment-488527994 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2019 01:14:00 UTC