- From: Stephen Richard via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 20:02:50 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
The question that interests me is whether 'profile' should mean something that has implications for software implementations, or if it is a sort of qualitative statement something like 'a lot of what is this spec is adopted from pre-existing spec X (or specs X, Y, and Z)'. There are pre-conditions to be software actionable-- the base spec has to define some software-testable conformance requirements. If it doesn't, then there is no machine-actionable way to validate resources for conformance to that spec, and there is no point trying to formalize what a profile of that spec is in a machine-actionable sense. What I'm really interested in here is machine interoperability-- aggregators can harvest metadata conforming to some specification (or profile of a spec) so as to consistently index harvested metadata, present results to users, and offer value added services based on the harvested metadata. Software applications can advertise the kind input formats they need (a spec or profile of a spec), and datasets can declare a spec or profile of a spec they conform to so that search applications can get the user from data discovery to data utilization with fewer clicks. I tried to provide some concrete examples of this in [ID21](https://www.w3.org/TR/dcat-ucr/#ID21) and [ID22](https://www.w3.org/TR/dcat-ucr/#ID22). [ID2]((https://www.w3.org/TR/dcat-ucr/#ID2) and [ID3]((https://www.w3.org/TR/dcat-ucr/#ID3) are also related. -- GitHub Notification of comment by smrgeoinfo Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/963#issuecomment-507404748 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 1 July 2019 20:02:52 UTC