Re: [dxwg] How to express distributions provided as compressed files

@dr-shorthair A note to your comment in the email summary of the issue:
> If the content is simple then the “+zip” strategy on the media-type designator is OK

I disagree. 
1. Some media types already have an extension, e.g. `application/ld+json` and a media type cannot have 2 extensions
2. The `+zip` media type extension indicates the ZIP technique (`application/zip`), which is only one of many
3. It would be an extra place to look for information about compression.
4. What is a simple content and what is a complex content?

> This is a potential rabbit hole, too many layers is impractical 

Sure, too many layers are impractical, but I was proposing a quite simple solution to common (not all) situations, i.e. compressed file, packaged homogeneous files, and their combination. This also covers a compressed file with a standardized directory structure such as a Data Package.

@arminhaller Regarding your point in the minutes:
> What about a compressed file that contains ttl, n3 and rdf/xml files that are all equivalent

These should be 3 `dcat:Distribution`s, e.g. one for `.ttl.gz`, one for `.nt.gz` and one for `.rdf.gz`.

@andrea-perego Regarding your point in the minutes:
> for standard nested formats we don't need to do anything

We still need the proposed extension for the common situations.

> if nesting is done in an arbitrary way, a readme file within the structure should be used

Primary focus should be on machine readability. In cases something non-standard is used as a distribution, it should be in case where no standard DCAT ways are applicable and this should be documented in the datasets description and documentation.

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

Received on Thursday, 28 June 2018 10:48:25 UTC