Yes, we opened the issue to investigate if the property ```dcat:size``` plus a unit of measurement provided more flexibility than ```dcat:byteSize``` but we tracked back the reasons why ```dcat:size``` was deprecated (e.g. it would usually require the use of a blank node, see link above for more info). So, unless you (or others) think it would be necessary, I don't think we need to undeprecate ```dcat:size```. I wonder though if with the current representation is too cumbersome (or if there are limitations) to represent dataset distributions that are actually terabytes of data (e.g. multi-dimensional microscopy images can weigh up to several TB each and datasets can be hundreds of TB in total). -- GitHub Notification of comment by agbeltran Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/313#issuecomment-417225938 using your GitHub accountReceived on Thursday, 30 August 2018 07:57:06 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:28:24 UTC