- From: Rob Atkinson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2019 07:16:55 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@makxdekkers - excellent point : "So the relationship between an extension of DCAT-AP and DCAT-AP would need to be a stricter sub-property of prof:isProfileOf." This is essentially correct and natural and the implications are: 1) to have a stricter sub-property we would still need the existing super-property that handles all possible notions of conformance and supports the transitivity needed for conneg and data descriptions. 2) a sub-property could be defined to carry the additional ontological commitment for a specific notion of conformance. 3) we are not in a position to define these sub-properties yet as we have not been engaged in a systematic evidence capture and modelling of notions of conformance. so I would slightly reinterpret that statement this way: "the relationship between an extension of DCAT-AP and DCAT-AP would need to be a stricter sub-property of prof:isProfileOf to convey the specific meaning of conformance according to DCAT-AP extension rules, but can be validly described with isProfileOf to indicate that such a relationship exists and conformance to DCAT-AP is required." -- GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/507#issuecomment-531456914 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 14 September 2019 07:16:56 UTC