- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 13:02:10 -0800
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Antoine, I don't know exactly why that was the decision, although there is, in my mind, a practical question of what properties are needed to define new terms, and if those fit with the properties of a profile. Possibly there are also issues of IRI naming and discovery. kc On 1/9/18 12:42 PM, Antoine Isaac wrote: > Hi Karen, > > You're probably going to hate me for this reaction, especially > considering the time we've worked together on APs in the DC community... > But is there a very strong reason to say that something wouldn't be a > profile because it originates classes and properties? > To me what was core was the notion of re-using other vocabularies/model > (it would be much harder to define as a profile something that *only* > originates classes and properties), but it wasn't obvious that it would > forbid minting own classes and properties when appropriate. > So if it makes things easier and this rule of thumb can be softened (if > it does exist), perhaps we could propose it to the DC community? > > Antoine > > On 18/12/17 15:31, Karen Coyle wrote: >> Andrea, in answer to #2, by the Dublin Core definition, DCAT itself >> would not be a profile because it originates classes and properties. DC >> profiles reuse but do not create vocabulary elements. A DC profile is >> always based on vocabularies defined (preferably in a standard way) >> elsewhere. >> >> That said, presumably you could create a DCAT profile that is exactly >> all of the classes and properties that are included in DCAT. If profiles >> include information such as cardinality, value pick lists, etc., then >> such a profile would provide information not included in the DCAT >> ontology. >> >> kc >> >> >> On 12/18/17 5:05 AM, andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu wrote: >>> Dear Karen, dear Ruben, >>> >>> Thanks for initiating this page. >>> >>> A couple of comments / questions: >>> >>> 1. I think it may be worth including an explicit reference to the >>> definition of "profile" from RFC 6906 ("The 'profile' Link Relation >>> Type") [1]. @Ruben, if I'm not mistaken your definitions are >>> partially based on it. >>> >>> 2. Looking at the wiki page, it is unclear whether DCAT itself (and >>> any metadata schema, vocabulary, etc.) is considered or not a "profile". >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Andrea >>> >>> ---- >>> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6906 >>> >>> ---- >>> 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: Sunday, December 17, 2017 5:11 PM >>>> To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org >>>> Subject: Definitions page for Profiles >>>> >>>> Ruben and I have done the first set of definitions on the Profiles >>>> Context page [1]. You should add your own definitions and also comment >>>> on those that are there. This is a brainstorming exercise so please >>>> toss >>>> out your thoughts, respond to definitions and comments, and contribute >>>> to this. >>>> >>>> kc >>>> [1] >>>> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/ProfileContext#Discussion_of_Definitions >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Karen Coyle >>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >>>> m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal) >>>> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600 >>> >> > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal) skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Tuesday, 9 January 2018 21:02:39 UTC