W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > February 2019

Re: PROF: Ontology v. Vocabulary v. X?

From: pedro winstley <pedro.win.stan@googlemail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 09:12:11 +0000
Message-ID: <CABUZhHnGq=X+bAUHHxP4oqzKMqUW5n8ir7kdCpecSFmn0Tm=Gg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Car, Nicholas (L&W, Dutton Park)" <Nicholas.Car@csiro.au>
Cc: Dataset Exchange Working Group <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
+1 for vocabulary

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019, 06:38 Car, Nicholas (L&W, Dutton Park)
<Nicholas.Car@csiro.au wrote:

> Could DXWG members please express an opinion here at to whether “Profiles
> Ontology” or “Profiles Vocabulary” or something else is more appropriate
> for PROF?
>
> After some discussion before FPWD we agree on the former but some comments
> about PROF’s use of terms from other namespaces, e.g. dct:conformsTo, to
> say nothing of owl:Class, indicate that others would prefer either the
> latter or something else entirely as they understand an Ontology to
> typically use only 1 namespace.
>
> If DCAT was being made from scratch now with approximately the same
> output, what would it be called, “Dataset Vocabulary” or something else?
>
> Short initial responses please so we can assess whether it’s important to
> look into this further or not.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
>
> Nicholas Car
> Senior Experimental Scientist
> CSIRO
> nicholas.car@csiro.au | 0477 560 177
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2019 09:12:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:12 UTC