Re: [dxwg] Are we superseding DCAT 1 or not once DCAT 2 is a REC? (#1177)

@agbeltran wrote
> What do you think?

I like it. 
The only doubt is about the part  "if they want to use the new features." 

Let's consider an existing implementation in which a SPARQL endpoint is described in the old fashion DCAT style as embedded in a distribution instead of the DCAT 2 data service. 

My opinion is that, in cases like the above, we should encourage to follow DCAT2 and then recommend to upgrade to DCAT 2 data service, while the sentence seems to leave this slightly open.  

I guess that being DCAT 2014 not obsolete, the user can decide anyway not to stick to DCAT 2014, but he/she should be aware that this comes at the cost of being uncompliant with DCAT2.
Am I too restrictive?

Perhaps we might change "if they want to use the new feature." in "if they _need_ to use the new features."? 

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

Received on Monday, 9 December 2019 21:13:37 UTC