- From: Rob Atkinson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 20:22:49 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Renaming the metadata carrier for implementing artefacts (now ResourceDescriptor) has been raised multiple times over the last 6 months, so its great we are finally having a discussion. I dont have a position other than requirement for naming accuracy against the required scope. I.e. the use cases include resources such as specification documents, primers and guidance notes.. so 'rules' is a role, not a overarching class description for such things. Also a pdf document cant be given a dct:conformsTo predicate.. only its description can.. hence 'descriptor' .. but this is usually redundant.. dcat:Dataset is not a dataset .. its a cataloguable descriptor. But 'Resource' is probably a bad idea... Maybe 'Implementation' is the better choice. On Wed, 14 Nov 2018, 05:58 aisaac <notifications@github.com wrote: > I too have plenty comments on the ontology, but I think they will be for > later. This issue is just about the diagram anyway :-) > > — > You are receiving this because you were assigned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/404#issuecomment-438394478>, or mute > the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIR3YToIo3EaTOqrO4eEDvH_xKTdSjVQks5uuxZvgaJpZM4W2ci6> > . > -- GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/404#issuecomment-438422958 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2018 20:22:50 UTC