Re: [dxwg] Collate existing practice in use of dct:conformsTo with DCAT (#1225)

Thanks, @rob-metalinkage & @jakubklimek .

I think that we should then keep this issue open.

Defining a URI registry for `dct:conformsTo` is out of scope of DCAT and of the DXWG's mandate. However, it might be possible to provide guidance for at least a subset of the specifications that `dct:conformTo` may point to. The WG needs to discuss about this.

Meanwhile, my personal feedback.

We actually had to deal with the same issues in the JRC Data Catalogue, and in the definition of the JRC profile of DCAT-AP. We therefore explicitly defined the list of URIs to be used in the DCAT-AP-JRC specification mentioned above.

More precisely:
1. For metadata conformity, the list of URIs is documented in [§A.3](
2. For service conformity, we built upon the [list of URIs maintained by OSGeo](, and you can find the resulting list in [§A.4](

The additional issue you are pointing out, @jakubklimek , is that a resource may be conformant with a specific version of a specification. And, of course, it might be conformant with other specifications or profiles (e.g., a GeoDCAT-AP record is conformant with GeoDCAT-AP & DCAT-AP, and, at least at the conceptual level, with INSPIRE and the core profile of ISO 19115:2003).

If a PROF description is available, and the server/client is able to deal with a PROF description, versions and profiles will be resolved automatically. But if this is not the case, a possible option is to specify a `dct:conformsTo` statement for (at least some of) the relevant specifications, versions and profiles, including a link to the version-independent URI of a specification.

GitHub Notification of comment by andrea-perego
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in

Received on Wednesday, 28 October 2020 23:26:16 UTC