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

Re: [dxwg] Rename Resource Descriptor class (#573)

From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 15:00:25 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-531816861-1568646024-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
This is the place where the discussion on naming should happen. So I'm pasting the elements of #1061 that are relevant here:

From @rob-metalinkage : My preference has always been for a change to a better name for ResourceDescriptor, and I never much liked hasResource anyway. ProfileObject is really really awful however - every thing in a vocabulary could be called ProfileObject and no interpretation is possible. Given that the prime reason the ResourceDescriptor exists is as a qualified role association a name closer to that might be better. all the other things we want to add to it (as per DCAT distribution), format, conformsTo etc are all clues about its role too that are easier to machine-read than descriptive text ). Could people live with ResourceRole and hasResourceRole ?

From: @nicholascar we already have a ResourceRole class (it was formerly Role but we changes it at 2PWD). How about ProfileDistribution, a la DCAT?

From: @rob-metalinkage : agreed - ResourceRole is already better for the Role descriptor itself so agree best to rename ResourceDescriptor as making it more obvious this akin to DCAT distribution pattern will help, particularly as we have decided not to make profiles dependent on DCAT. We have an informal consensus that the ResourceDescriptor placeholder needs changing.

GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/573#issuecomment-531816861 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 16 September 2019 15:00:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:20 UTC