Re: [dxwg] Should dct:conformsTo point to a specific version of a specification? (#1338)

@andrea-perego - fair enough - this is a statement about service-type, which can be read as a very abstract version of a dct:Standard - where conformance (always a community practice) means implementation of some specific protocol that is classified as this service type.

I think the implication of this is that the OGC should mint formal profile definitions for serviceTypes - and make each specific standard declare itself to be a profile of one-or-more service types it implements.  

This is do-able, and confirms the underlying assumptions about the requirement for PROF as a formalism. I'll set up these declarations and seek review from the OGC and EU usage perspective.

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

Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in

Received on Sunday, 28 March 2021 23:06:42 UTC