- From: Rob Atkinson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 03:07:26 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Again, i think this is all implementation... if the resources are functionally equivalent and have the same role, then i dont see why you cant just list both formats - it really depends if you want to share metadata for the different forms or have different annotations. In the case of a resource that supports multiple formats and content-negotiation (the preferred, but not enforced approach) then you just list multiple formats. Otherwise you could have seperate descriptors as you suggest, or have multiple values of hasArtefact and extend the graph by defining the format of each artefact. This all relates to the general problem of data - the downloadURL is expected to be more ephemeral than the conceptual resource, and we are assuming a need to define metadata about disposition of profile resources independently of current points of access. Maybe the killer reasoning here is that an artefact may be available from multiple access points, and depending on who you are you may have access to different ones, or they may provide value-added services. -- GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/769#issuecomment-472261804 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2019 03:07:27 UTC