Re: [dxwg] definitions clarifications of conforms to (#1130)

@makxdekkers I have to agree with you "because it only created more confusion"  : I dont recognise any of my points (or the underlying concerns in http:range-14) in your re-characterisation of them ! 
 
"a dataset" is a conceptual thing, an encoding of a dcat:Dataset entity is an information resource describing it and a dcat:CatalogRecord is an information resource describing a dcat:Dataset (for example).  I dont think you are arguing otherwise.  

AFIACT you are not objecting to my opinion - only to your interpretation of my opinion - an I think your interpretation of my opinion is incorrect (that got very "meta"... )

My opinion is that the recommended resolution of the underlying concept of the http-range14 issue is va;lid (I dont agree with TBL's initial oversimplistic premise about # URIs) - and you have not questioned its validity or pointed to an alternative strategy. We can however agree the terminology is confusing ..., I wish I knew a better way of explaining this but would rather not proliferate yet more terminology.

Its the URI that matters here... the CatalogRecord needs its own URI - but the Dataset record can be based on some governance process that mints a URI for the conceptual object - or it can exist as a different type of thing - the record of "the dataset" in a particular catalog concept. In the latter case, it is necessary to have an additional layer of identification ..

DCAT itself is silent on the uniqueness of URIs for dcat:Dataset objects relative to "the dataset" being described - and I think very different assumptions might be made here, whereas no assumptions can be made safely.





-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1130#issuecomment-552652577 using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 11 November 2019 22:49:31 UTC