- From: kcoyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 16:03:30 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
I know nothing about errata in W3C specs, so I won't comment on that, but I do agree that 1) we should get word out sooner rather than later and 2) that we have had one discussion in which we rejected the idea of versioning the namespace, and I assume that we are not going to want to keep around a prior version of DCAT. The discussions in which Makx is promoting backward compatibility attest to the desire for a single, unified DCAT vocabulary. To my mind the big issue is the RDF vocabulary file. Is there a way to mark an RDF term as "in error"? or "withdrawn"? Can the vocabulary be changed, not just the written documentation? If foaf:Page is withdrawn from DCAT, there could be current DCAT documents and DCAT-APs that will not validate against the upcoming version of DCAT. If we are lucky, the number of uses is not great and dataset owners can correct any existing uses, but there will need to be some coordination between the vocabulary change and DCAT documentation updates. In fact, it seems darned complicated! -- GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/169#issuecomment-374994930 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2018 16:04:04 UTC