- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 08:42:16 -0800
- To: "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
I don't know whether we want to re-open this, but I see a disconnect between our current definition of profile and the graph structure for profiles provided by the profiles ontology. Our definition was written before we considered the profiles ontology as describing profiles, and my impression is that we were considering "profile" to be a single resource like DCAT-AP. Should we lean more toward the multi-resource possibility of prof:Profile in ProfGui, and does that mean that we need to have a definition of profile that looks more compatible with the profiles ontology? First, our definition states profile as a single thing: "A named set ..." which makes it compatible with prof:Profile. That's good. But then the definition moves on to say: "A named set of constraints ..." And this is where I begin to have issues. At the moment our definition goes on to say (in whole): "A named set of constraints on one or more identified base specifications, including the identification of any implementing subclasses of datatypes, semantic interpretations, vocabularies, options and parameters of those base specifications necessary to accomplish a particular function." However, the profiles ontology does not mandate the existence of a resource with either the role ":fullConstraints" or ":partialConstraints", and it isn't clear to me if a prof:Profile with only one resource that has the role ":guidance" would meet our definition of profile. Therefore it may be necessary for the ProfGui document to mandate certain content to meet the definition of "profile" as we are using it. In addition, nothing in our definition indicates that there can be more than one resource in this "set". I don't think that the one-sentence definition needs to do this but this becomes an issue for the guidance document that so far is not included there. This could become text for the section on Profile Description but I also think it needs to be introduced earlier on in the document. This would be where Antoine's revised diagram could be useful, and it may require a section in the profiles definition area that talks about the multi-faceted nature of profiles. If we think we need to discuss this I will open a github issue. -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal) skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2019 16:42:43 UTC