- From: scorpionkingeg via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 17:06:23 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
> For example, the scope note of Data service says: > > > The kind of service can be indicated using the dct:type property. Its value may be taken from a controlled vocabulary such as the INSPIRE spatial data service type vocabulary. > > The range of dct:type is rdfs:Class. This creates two serious issues: > 1. Ambiguity for querying `rdf:type` and `dct:type` > 2. The best practice for categorisation is to use SKOS-based controlled vocabularies. > Concretely I'm currently describing data services of a kind "REST API", "SPARQL Endpoint", "Download Service", and "Human Interaction Service". They are part of a reference dataset, of type `skos:Concept`, hence individuals in WOL sense. Although OWL2 allows punning, it would be nice if the recommendation does not suggest using classes for categorization, or -- better -- recommend either using SKOS-based controlled vocabularies for categorising of resource or -- where appropriate -- the standard rdf typing. > > See also [Corporate Reference Data Management policy in the European Commission](https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/corporate-reference-data-management). > > #dcat #service > > -- GitHub Notification of comment by scorpionkingeg Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1362#issuecomment-1601244378 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 21 June 2023 17:06:24 UTC