- From: Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 10:56:12 +0200
- To: "'Ghislain Atemezing'" <auguste.atemezing@eurecom.fr>, "'Laufer'" <laufer@globo.com>
- Cc: "'Bernadette Farias Loscio'" <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>, "'Carlos Iglesias'" <carlos.iglesias.moro@gmail.com>, "'DWBP Public List'" <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Ghislain, > > As others pointed out, we could define a small set of mandatory field > when providing the metadata. > Defining a small set of mandatory fields is not easy. In the DCAT-AP Working Group with participants representing around 30 data portals from many countries, regions and cities in Europe, a very minimal set (title, description, URL) was all everyone could agree on. Even the URL is conditional, to allow for the situation that a dataset distribution is not available, either because metadata is provided before publication of the data, or is maintained after decommissioning of the data. There is of course a balance to be found between making too much mandatory, which means there will be little data that follow best practice, and making too little mandatory, in which case it's hard to build a useful service on top of the metadata. In the DCAT-AP, there is, in addition to the 'mandatory' set, a set of 'recommended' fields for which publishers are strongly encouraged to provide information if at all possible. Maybe DWBP can do something similar? Makx.
Received on Friday, 16 May 2014 08:56:45 UTC