W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > August 2018

Re: [dxwg] Requirement: Profiles may be written in or may link to a document or schema in a validation language (ShEx, SHACL, XMLschema). [ID41] (5.41)

From: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 14:48:05 +1000
Message-ID: <CACfF9Lx42K6qhhWX13ORO1xhD2f5XsLxb0e3OnWb4XzkQu2krQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vladimir Alexiev via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Cc: Dataset Exchange Working Group <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
There are two reasons we dont just reuse dcat:Dataset

1. We need to model more aspects of profiles including their relationships
to each other and different possible roles of resources.

2. We decided profile descriptions  are a broader concern than  cataloguing

Thus the alignment between Profiles and dcat:Resources is what we are
concerned about here and perhaps more explicitly whether subclasses of
Resource are disjoint. I'm agnostic whether in the alignment Profile is a
subclass of Resource or Dataset... but for backwards compatability could we
add a note and example stating that a Profile MAY be considered as a
dataset of constraint objects?

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018, 10:32 Simon Cox via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org> wrote:

> (I also recall @makxdekkers and @philarcher warning us against making
> strong _dependencies_ on ADMS - we should certainly learn from it, but
> maybe not build it into a potentially brittle dependency chain? - also see
> #111 )
> --
> GitHub Notification of comment by dr-shorthair
> Please view or discuss this issue at
> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/279#issuecomment-417511439 using your
> GitHub account
Received on Friday, 31 August 2018 04:49:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:05 UTC