- From: makxdekkers via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 07:23:39 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@dr-shorthair Are you suggesting that one approach could be to create a `dcat:status` on the example of `adms:status`, rather than using the ADMS property directly? What would be our criteria to either use or create new properties in parallel to ones that already exist? I remember we had the discussion in GLD whether to use DCMI terms or create the same properties in the DCAT namespace. The decision then was that the DCMI terms were sufficiently 'trustworthy' to be used. ADMS is in W3C namespace space so it can be trusted, but maybe an issue is that ADMS is not actively maintained? Another thing to take into account is that, as @andrea-perego writes, `adms:status` is already being used in real-life applications, so we might complicate things for current implementations by replacing it. -- GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1238#issuecomment-633856095 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2020 07:23:45 UTC