Fwd: [datacatalogs] Update re DCAT and catalog spec

See below for some comments from Rufus Pollock regarding some of the issues we still have open in DCAT.


(Related to ISSUE-8, ISSUE-9, ISSUE-43)

Begin forwarded message:
> From: Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock@okfn.org>
> Date: 26 October 2012 16:28:21 GMT+01:00
> To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
> Cc: James McKinney <james@opennorth.ca>, data-catalogs <data-catalogs@lists.okfn.org>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: [datacatalogs] Update re DCAT and catalog spec
> Reply-To: rufus.pollock@okfn.org
> On 26 October 2012 14:32, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:
>> Hi Rufus,
>> In addition to what James said: The old issue regarding the naming of “Distribution” vs “Resource”, and what exactly a distribution/resource is, is still open.
> Personally, I'm fairly agnostic here. I think distribution is "wrong"
> but perhaps we could just go with the instances e.g. DataFile and
> DataAPI / DataService and forget having a superclass (I think this is
> almost what we reached last time - the issue was the property name but
> one could just go for: dataFile and dataAPI or dataResource ...)
>> Some in the working group feel that it's best to define this class narrowly and to refer only to means of accessing the dataset. Others feel that it should be broadened to include other material related to the dataset, such as documentation and examples.
> I have to say I would now come down against documentation and
> examples. If they are needed (which I'm not sure they are atm) we
> could always invent something for them. In CKAN we now have idea of a
> "Related Item" (e.g. Visualizations, News stories, Papers, and could
> be Documentation). I think this makes more sense than lumping this in
> with the data.
>> I think there's a lot of uncertainty regarding what kinds of “resources” could be usefully related to a dataset. This somewhat mirrors the discussions regarding resource types around the Data Hub. The resource types currently defined in the spec are:
>> - Download
>> - Feed
>> - Web service
>> - Other (indirect access to the dataset through a form, etc.)
>> Any new information on the general experience with resource types would be valuable feedback to the working group (public-gld-comments@w3.org). I could imagine that you have some new information there regarding CKAN and the Data Hub. Open questions are for example:
>> - Is such a classification of resources useful at all?
>> - Does one classification work for all catalogs or do they have different needs?
>> - What types should be included or not included?
> Let's keep it simple. I'd say DataFile (or DataDownload) and
> WebService/DataAPI and you could even leave out the latter for the
> time being.
> Rufus

Received on Friday, 26 October 2012 16:34:45 UTC