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

Re: [dxwg] Best practice for a loosely-structured catalog

From: Jakub Klímek via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:36:24 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-396843585-1528875383-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@dr-shorthair I see. After giving it some thought, I also quite like the idea of a `dcat:distribution` being just one of the possible `dct:relation`s. 

Still, my main concern is that accommodating this kind of loose description adds complexity to consumers of such data (both people and applications such as data catalogs) in the sense that some DCAT records will be described only by a `dcat:Dataset` with a bunch of  `dct:related` resources, others will have proper `dcat:distribution`s and the consumers will have to account for all these possibilities and maybe more. The benefit is that maybe some publishers using `dcat:distribution`s wrong, will use `dct:related` instead.

In the end, it all comes down to whether we should accommodate existing behavior where datasets are clearly not described well enough (for various reasons), or encourage describing them properly. Maybe this could be done by at least strongly recommending to stick to the Dataset -> Distribution -> File or Dataset -> Data Distribution Service pattern.

GitHub Notification of comment by jakubklimek
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/253#issuecomment-396843585 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2018 07:36:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:04 UTC