Fwd: Re: Reusing DCAT namespace for DWBP vocabs

Thanks to Richard for providing feedback on the reuse of DCAT ns for DQV 
and DUV:
--------------------------

Hi Dee,

My view is that different vocabularies should have different namespaces. Having some terms in a namespace governed by one document and then other terms in the same namespace governed by a different document is confusing and counter-intuitive. It makes future maintenance harder, as several documents with complex interrelationships would be affected.

The strongest argument for putting everything into one namespace is, I suppose, convenience for data publishers. They wouldn’t have to remember which term is in which namespace. But this ship has sailed a long time ago. In RDF, we have to live with terms being scattered over different namespaces. Even when just using plain DCAT, one has to use terms in the DC and SKOS namespaces.

That being said, it’s the WG’s decision and not Fadi’s or mine, and I don’t believe there’s any rule against adding terms to a REC-defined namespace using a NOTE.

Please feel free to forward this message to the list or share its contents in whatever way you see fit.

All the best,
Richard

Received on Wednesday, 7 October 2015 12:37:27 UTC