- From: Riccardo Albertoni via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 18:38:50 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Hi @nfreire and @aisaac, > Hello DXWG, > > At Europeana, we are designing a profile where we need to use the class dcat:Distribution without using any of the three properties dcat:accessURL, dcat:accessService and dcat:downloadURL. I admit I have some problems imagining the use case. What do these distributions represent? > The dcat:Distribution states in the last paragraph of section 6.7: > > > Links between a dcat:Distribution and services or Web addresses where it can be accessed are expressed using dcat:accessURL, dcat:accessService, dcat:downloadURL, as shown in Figure 1 and described in the definitions below. > > In the usage notes for these three properties, it is writen: > > > dcat:accessService SHOULD be used to link to a description of a dcat:DataService that can provide access to this distribution. > > > dcat:accessURL SHOULD be used for the URL of a service or location that can provide access to this distribution, typically through a Web form, query or API call. > > > dcat:downloadURL SHOULD be used for the URL at which this distribution is available directly, > > Many thanks in advance. Your use of dcat:Distribution is not the classic intended case, but in general, I like to take a liberal interpretation where "anything is possible unless not explicitly forbidden". In this case, I do not remember an explicit prohibition, but other editors/contributors might recall otherwise here. I have reported their [bcp 14](https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp14) definitions below, as I think the difference between "MUST" and "SHOULD" helps, 1. **MUST** This word, or the terms "REQUIRED" or "SHALL", mean that the definition is an absolute requirement of the specification. ... 3. **SHOULD** This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, **but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course.** In this spirit, I think you can use the dcat:distribution without the properties above provided that (i) you are not "reinventing" a solution for a use case we have already solved differently; (ii) you are not using other properties in place of those suggested by DCAT to say what you would have featured with the original DCAT properties. I hope this general consideration is helpful. If it is not, I am afraid that we need further info about your specific case to frame the reply more. -- GitHub Notification of comment by riccardoAlbertoni Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1197#issuecomment-567157502 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 18 December 2019 18:38:51 UTC