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

Re: [dxwg] Are PROF roles misplaced in resourceDescription? (#769)

From: kcoyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 15:21:57 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-467051779-1551108116-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@rob-metalinkage What this comes down to, I believe, is whether PROF is a vocabulary for DCAT profiles or whether it is a general solution for any profiles. Using DCAT Distribution would presumably only be relevant to the former. Some of the assumptions that I perceive that drive the DCAT model (such as you mention above, having non-stable access URLs, or wishing to catalog profiles using a Distribution as a proxy or surrogate) are not universal. A general-purpose language wouldn't prevent the use of a Distribution-like catalog entry for a resource if folks wish to employ that. Requiring it, though, would be a limitation in my opinion. It would also make it difficult to integrate it with the profiles guidance work, which is not DCAT-specific.

In addition, moving on to including a "way to handle cataloguing" is considerably beyond the scope that we have agreed on up to now for PROF. If that is needed for a PROF implementation of DCAT APs, then it should be defined there. In essence, PROF the vocabulary will probably be used within a profile of PROF (getting meta!), since RDF itself provides no actual constraints, only inferences. And I can point to Dublin Core as proof that a general purpose vocabulary with minimal semantic commitment is very useful.

GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/769#issuecomment-467051779 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 25 February 2019 15:21:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:13 UTC