- From: Ed Staub <ed.staub@semanterra.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 23:11:10 -0500
- To: <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>, <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
I am working on an ontology for public cataloging of data cubes that could be an extension of the RDF Data Cube Vocabulary, where dimensions and measures are provided, but no observations. If successful, there could be a lot of public instances of this around. While AFAICT it is technically valid to extend the Data Cube Vocabulary in this way, it seems like it may be in conflict with the intended use of the vocabulary, and might lead to undesired behavior by tools that implicitly expect instantiations of the Data Cube vocabulary to not be "empty suits" - to contain the data that they describe. Is this observation-less usage of the Data Cube Vocabulary for cataloging advisable? -Ed Staub
Received on Friday, 14 November 2014 08:40:06 UTC