W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > July 2017

RE: Agenda July 10, 2017

From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:06:48 +0000
To: <mail@makxdekkers.com>, <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <56b880ff85c048ac8379ff744a444de2@exch1-mel.nexus.csiro.au>
I tend to think that non-information/off-web things like equipment is out of scope for DCAT. 

However, 'dataset' (or even 'data') is just a sequence of 1s and 0s, so to me things like software, source code, vocabularies and ontologies, as well as images, other multi-media, models and other structured data are all in scope. 

Of course this is exactly the issue that UC ID8 was attempting to raise. You suggest that ' those things could be either subclasses of dcat:Dataset or be identified with a type property'. Of course the very special rdf:type property joins those two ideas together. In general I expect that the list of types (semantic types, not media-types of course) needs to be extensible and thus maintained separately from the core vocabulary, probably in more than one place. See Andrea's spreadsheet for some candidate lists - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nlAgLUGQcBe40oTk5WNCVz-6rud1JtLwjoYyyqAT45U 


-----Original Message-----
From: Makx Dekkers [mailto:mail@makxdekkers.com] 
Sent: Friday, 7 July, 2017 17:01
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Subject: RE: Agenda July 10, 2017


The D in DCAT may not be the problem. After all, D stands for Data -- DCAT is the *Data* Catalog Vocabulary, not the *Dataset* Catalog Vocabulary.

Maybe we could look at different approaches for different types of resources, e.g.

a. if something is not *data*, maybe there is a need for a different vocabulary alongside DCAT, e.g. an Equipment Catalog Vocabulary, Service Catalog Vocabulary etc. This might be out of scope for this WG?


b. if something is not a *dataset*, maybe there is a need for a class of things alongside the dcat:Dataset, so a dcat:Catalog could contain dcat:Dataset and dcat:Equipment and dcat:Service etc.


c. if we want to lump all kinds of 'things' together under dcat:Dataset, those things could be either subclasses of dcat:Dataset or be identified with a type property.


-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org] 
Sent: 06 July 2017 19:02
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Agenda July 10, 2017

On a more general point, a couple of times people have suggested to me that the D of DCAT is sometimes unhelpful; that is, one might think in terms of a catalogue vocabulary, where the items in the catalogue
*might* be datasets, yes, or, perhaps things like equipment (think projectors and smart boards in university campus).

The current definition of a dataset is (deliberately) so broad that it's close to the definition of the more general notion of an 'Information Resource'


On 06/07/2017 17:05, Makx Dekkers wrote:
> Karen, all,
> If I may, I would suggest not to start the discussion trying to define what a Dataset is. It seems to me that it would be more practical to look at what Simon mentions at the end of his problem statement "a way for a DCAT description to indicate the 'type' of dataset involved".
> Makx.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net]
> Sent: 06 July 2017 17:28
> To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Agenda July 10, 2017
> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2017.07.10

> This agenda follows Jaroslav's and Makx's suggestions by initiating the discussion of "what is a dataset?"
> kc
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net

> m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Received on Thursday, 20 July 2017 05:07:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:28:19 UTC