Re: [dxwg] prof:inheritedFrom needs more convincing case and/or example (#642)

In the current design, profile follows the same basic pattern as DCAT - without being dependent on DCAT. Care has been taken not to be incompatible with DCAT so that in the open world assumption (OWA)  DCAT (and/or ADMS) could be used for the cataloguing of profiles. 

So @kcoyle - any profile can carry any administrative metadata - and indeed should, its just not defined in this vocabulary.

(DCAT alignments are non-normative but available in https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/gh-pages/profilesont/alignment_dcat.ttl)

Which leads us to distributions - all the cases discussed are covered already - but we perhaps need examples in how to use the basic OWA and  Web mechanisms to achieve this

for example 

if an artifact is a SHACL file that describes validation rules  then the ResourceDescriptor is the equivalent of a dcat:Distribution - a carrier of metadata about its role, format and information profile (eating our own dog food).

If the SHACL file is available as both a .TTL and a .RDF encoding then either:

1) the artifact URI supports content negotiation and we declare dct:format <TTL>,<RDF> .

or 

2) these two encodings are only available at different URIs - and we create two ResourceDescriptors, one for each artefact. This is where the "role" semantics has to be careful - we can have two normative artefacts that only differ by dct:format attribute.

I suggest an informative section on "cataloguing Profiles and artefacts" as this seems to be where things need explaining.


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/642#issuecomment-463342218 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2019 19:50:13 UTC