Re: [dxwg] question > is a software solution a dcat:Dataset? (#1221)

 
> @bertvannuffelen My hunch is that software and code is a stretch within 'dataset' but it would not be hard to specify a new class for your application.

So I guess we can't avoid to discuss this yet again...

@dr-shorthair When you say it "is a stretch" you are basically talking about boundaries -- you apparently have an idea of what a '_collection of data_' is and what is not. As far as I am concerned, if we want to make this operational, we would need to have a clearly and explicitly written definition of Dataset that would make it abundantly clear to anyone that software can't possibly be in that same class. The case is that we don't have such a definition. 

I am wondering whether your opinion is that software is not a '_collection of data_'? Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software: "_...software, is a **collection of data** or computer instructions that tell the computer how to work_". Not  saying that I think Wikipedia is the best place to get good definitions, but at least it shows that there _are_ people who think software _is_ a collection of data.

Of course, this group could decide to narrow down the definition or issue additional guidance to say that only data of a certain, clearly defined or enumerated, kind can be considered in-scope -- but then we get into trouble with backward compatibility, given that I know for sure that people have described software with [ADMS ](https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-adms/)which is a W3C-recognised profile of DCAT.

So, I'd ask again "_what do we gain by retrospectively narrowing the definition of dataset to exclude certain types of digital objects?_" and also, "_what problems does narrowing the definition create for existing applications?_"


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1221#issuecomment-595114102 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 5 March 2020 09:12:28 UTC