- From: Svensson, Lars <L.Svensson@dnb.de>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 07:44:41 +0000
- To: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- CC: "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Hi Rob, On Tuesday, January 09, 2018 10:35 PM, Rob Atkinson [mailto:rob@metalinkage.com.au] wrote: [...] > (IMHO this is a strong reason to have a strong profile model defined - conformance for > a profile would be that it _can_ be described in such a formalism - profiles may still > exist that are only normatively described in PDF ) Can you expand a bit on what such a formalism would look like? One of my core requirements would be that it's technology-independent so that you can apply it to any kind of structured data format (e. g. RDF, XML or MARC 21) Best, Lars > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 at 08:02 Karen Coyle <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: > 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, mailto: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:mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net] > >>>> Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2017 5:11 PM > >>>> To: mailto: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 > >>>> mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > >>>> m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal) > >>>> skype: kcoylenet/tel:+1%20510-984-3600 > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- > Karen Coyle > mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal) > skype: kcoylenet/tel:+1%20510-984-3600
Received on Wednesday, 10 January 2018 07:45:11 UTC