- From: <andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 17:16:50 +0000
- To: <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
- CC: <alejandra.gonzalezbeltran@oerc.ox.ac.uk>
Thanks for clarifying this point, Karen. Probably what should then be done is to revise the use case by including examples making clear what it talks about. Actually, this use case is a generalisation of other 4 more specific use cases I contributed, covering data lineage [1], agent roles [2], data quality [3], and conformity [4]. Moreover, UC5.32 [5], contributed by Alejandra, is also related. So, we could re-use some of the examples in these UCs. Andrea ---- [1] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID12 [2] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID13 [3] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID14 [4] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID16 [5] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID32 ---- Andrea Perego, Ph.D. Scientific / Technical Project Officer European Commission DG JRC Directorate B - Growth and Innovation Unit B6 - Digital Economy Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262 21027 Ispra VA, Italy https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/ ---- The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. >-----Original Message----- >From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net] >Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 6:02 PM >To: PEREGO Andrea (JRC-ISPRA); public-dxwg-wg@w3.org >Subject: Re: dxwg-ACTION-59: Write up a general case for requirements 6.27 and >6.28 > >My recollection, Andrea, is that most of the group did not understand in >any level of detail what the Use Case was requiring of DCAT. I suspect >that if the requirement is to require that DCAT include both unqualified >and qualified terms, that many will consider that out of scope. At the >least we would need a list of terms that need an additional, qualified >form. There could, however, be guidance regarding the need for qualified >terms and suggesting preferred solutions. Honestly, we didn't discuss it >in any depth because I don't believe that the use case was generally >understood. > >I would suggest marking these two requirements as currently undecided in >the FPWD, and we can set aside a time in the near future to clarify this >with the group and decide what to do with them. > >If anyone remembers it differently, please let us know. > >kc > >On 11/28/17 4:31 AM, andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu wrote: >> This action was about the creation of a general use case for these two >requirements (now 6.8.4 [1] & 6.8.5 [2]), concerning the use of "qualified forms" >for specifying relationships between a dataset and related resources. >> >> The reference UC (5.19 [3]) is however already generic, so I wonder whether >there's a specific aspect that needs to be addressed here. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Andrea >> >> ---- >> [1] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#RID19.1 >> [2] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#RID19.2 >> [3] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID19 >> >> ---- >> Andrea Perego, Ph.D. >> Scientific / Technical Project Officer >> European Commission DG JRC >> Directorate B - Growth and Innovation >> Unit B6 - Digital Economy >> Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262 >> 21027 Ispra VA, Italy >> >> https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/ >> >> ---- >> The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may >> not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official >> position of the European Commission. >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Dataset Exchange Working Group Issue Tracker >>> [mailto:sysbot+tracker@w3.org] >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 10:43 PM >>> To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org >>> Subject: dxwg-ACTION-59: Write up a general case for requirements 6.27 and >>> 6.28 >>> >>> dxwg-ACTION-59: Write up a general case for requirements 6.27 and 6.28 >>> >>> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/59 >>> >>> Assigned to: Andrea Perego >> > >-- >Karen Coyle >kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal) >skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2017 17:17:24 UTC