Re: [dxwg] profileDesc and the Guidance document

If we take the view proposed by @aisaac and @larsgsvensson of providing a model rather than an ontology, it seems that the outline would look like:

* Introduction (non-normative)
  * What is a profile (normative)
        * A profile MUST have URI (or an IRI?) identifying it. The URI SHOULD be an http URI
        * A profile SHOULD have a title
        * A profile SHOULD have a textual description intended for humans
        * A profile document MAY link to schemas implementing the profile it describes
        * A profile SHOULD/MAY? have a description
  * Examples (non-normative)
       * ODRL is a good example since their profiles are explicitly media-type independent
       * DCAT APs
* Definitions (normative)
    * Profile
    * Schema (?)
    * Formalism (?)
    * ...
* Profile description (normative)
      * Background, motivation, use cases
      * Design rationale
      * Model and elements
      * Example(s) (non-normative)
* Bibliography

(Note: I'm not sure about saying in the profile guidance that a profile SHOULD have a description because that is something new that we will be recommending but none of our existing profiles have them. I would see the profile description as being RECOMMENDED but applying mainly to future development.)

GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Received on Saturday, 2 June 2018 07:37:55 UTC