I agree with @agbeltran -- the base DCAT model provides a foundation for describing many kinds of resources-- not just datasets. As it stands, applications or communities using DCAT as a foundation will need to provide validation resources and documentation for their resource descriptions. The application profile spec (DCAT-AP) provides guidance on doing that. I think DCAT already has ['a pattern and vocabulary for catalogs of descriptions of interesting things'](https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1235#issue-602621819); messaging that it's only for datasets is not necessary, and misses an opportunity for a more broadly useful documentation scheme. Looking at the UML model in [DCAT Scope](https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat-2/#dcat-scope), it seems to me that the model can be quite nicely modularized, with all but dcat:Dataset and dcat:DataService in a generic 'RCAT' (resource catalog) module, and cat:DataSet, dcat:DataService in a 'Dataset' module. Distribution should be a property on any resource; a Distribution should specify the representations available for the resource, as well as the requests necessary to obtain a particular representation. My hope is that a vocab like DCAT (and RCAT?) can be integrated into schema.org (sdo) to take advantage of the (apparently) lower impedance to adoption for sdo. Better yet supersede SDO with a semantically coherent vocabulary that enables inference and automation. sdo already has 'CreativeWork' as the generic class that appears to most closely correspond to 'Resource' in the sense of DCAT. -- GitHub Notification of comment by smrgeoinfo Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1235#issuecomment-616789875 using your GitHub accountReceived on Monday, 20 April 2020 20:27:31 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:28:34 UTC