Re: [dxwg] Funding source [RFS] (#66)

+1000 to Makx's comment. I've raised this other times too. We need to be
cautious not to make this work too slanted to the research domain. If we do
we may put off potential users of the vocabulary from other domains.  This
is supposed to be a relatively context neutral, high level vocabulary. All
the work being done in profiles indicates that this is where we think
specialisation should be added to the mix.

On Fri, 23 Nov 2018, 09:24 makxdekkers via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org wrote:

> It may be late in the day for my comment, but I do think that the
> indication of a funding source for a dataset as discussed here is quite
> domain-specific as it applies mostly to datasets that were produced in the
> context of a research grant. This may be a very real need in this
> particular domain, but I am not sure it needs to be in the core of DCAT --
> especially because there are other ways to express the relationship (using
> prov and proj). I do not find @nicholascar's earlier statement '_as they
> may not have Project objects represented as first class objects_' a
> compelling argument to include a property in DCAT.
> In the work we did on the European DCAT-AP, in the context of government
> data portals, many people expressed the need for a property to link a
> dataset to a mandate/law/regulation that was the reason a  dataset had been
> created/published. However, it was thought that this was a domain-specific
> need and therefore not to be included in the core of DCAT.
> Where do we draw the line between general and domain-specific requirements?
>
> --
> GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers
> Please view or discuss this issue at
> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/66#issuecomment-441189869 using your
> GitHub account
>
>