- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 11:04:46 +0100
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- CC: "public-csv-wg@w3.org" <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
On 08/10/14 10:30, Dan Brickley wrote: > On 8 October 2014 10:16, Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote: >> On 04/10/14 08:06, Ivan Herman wrote: >>>> >>>> 1. We define a small set of core properties that we consider to be >>>> essential in the metadata. "We define" means that we specify the terms to be >>>> used in the metadata specification as well as their data types and intended >>>> meaning >> >> >> This makes sense though I do have one small question: >> >> By "we define" do you include giving it a w3c-csv:xyz URI then define >> skos:/rdfs:/owl: mappings to other vocabularies? Or, if not, in what way is >> it different to defining a property or class? > > That (creating an actual vocabulary definition) sounds the simplest > way of making sure we're precise. However we might not want to be more > precise than the mass-deployment vocabularies we're basing it on, and > both DC and schema.org are pretty flexible. And of course it is > comically close to http://xkcd.com/927/ ... Sure but a broadly worded definition isn't trying to be completely prescriptive. The defintion is going to be quite broad so only "precise" in the sense of a defintion at all. "it's a title" - we don't constrain what a 'title' is. This, and Ivan's message, are just about whether the same broad definition is given a URI name of not. Having "http://w3/csv#" and the list in the original message seem no more than "data on the web" to me. Andy > > Dan >
Received on Wednesday, 8 October 2014 10:05:16 UTC