Re: [dxwg] semantics of the dcat:bbox attribute could (should?) be more explicit (#1392)


> About "why its in here": I see a lot of clarifying arguments, especially in issue 83. I agree with the formal arguments about why you might want a separate object property to describe this particular usecase. But I maintain it should be handled by a geospatially oriented vocabulary and not by one aimed at data cataloging. I would say it makes the catalogging vocabulary cluttered/bulky/bloated with concepts that are/should be handled in different domains 

This is a general issue on modularity and reuse. I agree that if there would be like dcterms a very generic geo vocabulary defining the bounding box of a resource (geo:bbox) then this property could be reused in this usage context. However it does not. (At least to my knowledge). To satisfy the usecase to express bounding box information about the spatial coverage of a dataset a new property has to be created with a URI in the DCAT domain. 
That is all fine.

The issue comes when other people would like to reuse this property outside the scope of DCAT. Then the story becomes difficult. Because then it looks as if DCAT has defined the domain neutral universal property geo:bbox, while DCAT is, as you mentioned, a scoped vocabulary about cataloging resources. 

From the DCAT vocabulary perspective one cannot avoid the cherry picking reuse beyond the DCAT scope. But I agree DCAT should not become the upper ontology for the semantic web, just because this one is active.  In the first place the semantics given to dcat:bbox should support the DCAT usecases. In that case I am happy with the current definition, and do not feel the need to add "physical" to it. It, though, might be improved w.r.t. 'resource'. I admit that by reading the paragraph as such one could interpret _resource_ as a cataloged resource and not as a rdfs:Resource. Because the domain is way up, and only visible after scrolling. This might be (one of) the source(s) for filing the issue.  For other properties in the same situation: e.g. the domain has been added. 



GitHub Notification of comment by bertvannuffelen
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in

Received on Thursday, 26 August 2021 14:44:43 UTC