- From: Ed Staub <estaub2@comcast.net>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 23:11:06 -0500
- To: <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Note that the RDF Data Cube vocabulary has a different definition of "dataset" than DCAT: "Represents a collection of observations, possibly organized into various slices, conforming to some common dimensional structure." Assuming the DCAT definition is used, I think it useful to make clear that a "common dimensional structure" is not implied. FWIW, my prior experience led me to assume the "common dimensional structure" meaning for DCAT until I dug into the DCAT spec. On the "too-broad" side, there probably are collections of data published or curated by a single agent that are larger than is intended by this definition. In particular, I agree with Bernadette Lóscio in thinking that the collection's content should be related - not "a random assortment of data". As an extreme example, imagine the entire content of datahub.io described as a single dataset! So... I'd suggest adding the word "related": "A related collection of data, published or curated by a single agent, ^^^^^^^ and available for access or download in one or more formats." The addition of "related" deals with both concerns at once; it would be strange and tautological to require all the data in a single cube to be "related". -Ed Staub
Received on Friday, 14 November 2014 08:40:06 UTC