Re: [dxwg] Use of dct:type with both Class and Concept

It sounds like the nice solution would be if dct:type was relaxed to range rdfs:Resource

However - it is legal to have a skos:Concept as the target of dct:type - it just needs to be recognised that the intent is thus to treat these targets as rdfs:Classes too.

If the target is declared to be both a skos:Concept and a rdfs:Class already - then having two different predicates adds a complication - do you need to fill in both?

If we want to enforce an OWL-DL compatible profile of DCAT. whereby referenced resources are also resolved to return OWL-DL compatible resources, how do we specify this, enforce it and validate it? This is why I think there needs to be an explict Use Case for OWL-DL semantics to give us requirements - because the current examples are not "used in a wrong way" - they are just used in an OWL-Full way, and nothing at this stage says this is actually wrong AFAICT. 

So, if we are to support an OWL-DL compatibility constraint, we need to establish the exact requirements and explore available solutions.  A new predicate is a specific solution to a requirement we dont formally recognise (at this stage) IMHO.

If we have such a requirement, we then need to make a decision if this is a matter for DCAT core or for a profile of DCAT. 

Perhaps writing a OWL-DL profile of DCAT - that enforces such constraints would be a good exercise anyway - then we can consider how much could be migrated to DCAT core, but right now we are guessing a little how it would be testable in practice, which is a requirement for W3C reccomendations.

GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 30 August 2018 06:31:43 UTC