Re: [dxwg] profileDesc and the Guidance document

@larsgsvensson said:

> I also agree with @aisaac that we should be technology-neutral. And I also would point out that (to me) the URI identifies the profile as a `resource` that can have many `representations`. With that terminology there is no `profile document` since any document will be (only) a `representation` of the profile `resource`. (I. e. let's use the web architecture terminology)

Well, we have the example of DCAT (and ADMS), where we have a resource (`dcat:Dataset` / `adms:Asset`) and its representations (via `dcat:Distribution` / `adms:AssetDistribution`). Analogously, the profile document will correspond to profile metadata (title, description, publisher) and whereas profile representations will correspond to the human- and/or machine-readable definitions of the profile (the list of re-used classes and properties, and their constraints).

GitHub Notification of comment by andrea-perego
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 4 June 2018 21:05:54 UTC