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

Re: [dxwg] Revisiting the definition of "profile" (#963)

From: Karen Coyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 14:20:19 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-507285227-1561990818-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@dr-shorthair I'm not sure what exactly you are including in "they". If you look at DCAT-AP, which I assume we consider an application profile, then there is a significant portion of that document is cannot be ennumerated. There is introductory material, and the organization of the document includes the division of terms into categories, which would suggest that these are all subsets.

> 4 DCAT APPLICATION PROFILE PROPERTIES PER CLASS
> A quick reference table of properties per class is included in Annex I.
> 4.1 Catalogue
> 4.1.1 Mandatory properties for Catalogue

If you are only considering the terms themselves, outside of the document, then you may be referring to the RDF or SHACL files as "enumerations", but those are greatly reduced in content from the AP itself, even lacking the usage notes and categories of the PDF document. Could the enumeration contain everything in the AP? I dont' think we've shown that to be the case yet, although that is a worthy goal. 

If we allow our definition to include APs that are expressed as documents, like DCAT-AP, then we cannot limit them to things that can be considered "sets" in the formal sense of that term, and the definition suggested by Antoine has an air of formality, so people would not be wrong to assume the mathematical sense of "set" rather than the very information "any bunch of stuff".

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/963#issuecomment-507285227 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 1 July 2019 14:20:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 October 2019 00:15:54 UTC