- From: Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au>
- Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:46:52 +1000
- To: eGovernment Interest Group WG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
It would certainly make sense to consider a dcat:Dataset as a publication resource (aka an Expression in library cataloguing terms). This would open up dcat:Datasets to interoperability with Dublin Core/RDA if each distribution was considered a physical publication (aka Manifestation) of the Dataset and simply described accordingly using open standard (RDA?) library cataloguing-in-publication metadata or other metadata standards (such as AGLS in Australia) Happy to discuss further if that doesn't make sense :) Chris Beer (iPhone) On 27/08/2010, at 9:17, eGovernment Interest Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: > > ISSUE-43 (abstract_dataset): attach specific properties to dcat:Distribution and not to dcat:Dataset [dcat] > > http://www.w3.org/egov/IG/track/issues/43 > > Raised by: Fadi Maali > On product: dcat > > based on feedback from Adrian Pohl: > > "Define a dcat:Dataset as an abstract resource independent from its instantiation in time and specific formats. This would mean to attach information about formats, release data and modification date as well as licensing information at distribution level. (Of course you'd have to the class dcat:Distribution for this.) In our cases for example the release date of the dataset and its distribution differs." > > This also will solve the problem of different distributions having different licenses i.e. license is not attached to the dataset but to each individual distribution. > > see: https://wiki1.hbz-nrw.de/display/SEM/Using+dcat+for+Open+Bibliographic+Data > > >
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2010 23:47:00 UTC