Re: [dxwg] authenticity and integrity of dcat files and associated datasets (#1526)

Thanks for the feedback. We discussed the issue of integrity and authenticity in the [DXWG plenary]( Let me try to summarize part of the discussion below.

The core of our work is DCAT as a metadata model, and integrity and authenticity seem to relate more to how DCAT is provided than the DCAT model itself. We are reluctant to address issues “Not at the core” of the group mandate. We want to avoid our DCAT-limited perspective can later conflict with more devoted solutions stemming from new groups working on promoting transversal technology, which might be chosen to deliver DCAT metadata.

As one of the most typical ways to serve DCAT, the RDF encoding provides an example of the above concerns. Typically, a DCAT encoding in RDF might end in an RDF store or file. In the case of an RDF store, it is the chosen software which needs to implement the caveat to ensure integrity and authenticity. 
 In the case of RDF files, other ongoing W3C groups deal with the integrity of RDF content. In particular, the “canonicalizing and cryptographically hash of RDF Dataset W3C Working Group” [1]. 
The existence of dedicated efforts shows the timeliness of your comments.   If you think it might help, we can try to point to this ongoing initiative in the DCAT document. However, it seems reasonable first to wait for the RDF Dataset Canonicalization and Hash Working Group outcomes and check when their work consolidates if we can suggest adopting their recipes. Until then, we can move this issue to the [Future work - possible new requirements]( milestone.

Can you live with this solution till the grounding RDF solutions are delineated more? 


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

Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in

Received on Monday, 24 October 2022 13:44:20 UTC