Re: ISSUE-36 (Kill Radion?): Should RADion be killed off? [DCAT]

On 27/09/2012 13:36, Dave Reynolds wrote:
> On 27/09/12 13:15, Government Linked Data Working Group Issue Tracker
>> Killing it off means:
>
> [In focussing here I'm not advocating this option, just seeking to
> understand.]
>
>> - no visible relationship between two vocabularies that have a great
>> deal in common being published by the same WG;
>
> Does it?  If there are only three classes and each has a counterpart in
> dcat then could the ADMS classes be subClasses of the dcat ones?

I'm not sure it's right to make adms:SemanticAsset a sub class of 
dcat:Dataset although I see the attractiveness of the option.

Being less abstract, saying that adms:SemanticAsset is a subclass of 
dcat:Dataset means we're saying that:

1. all vocabularies and ontologies are datasets;
2. all controlled vocabularies like ISO country codes are datasets;
3. all standards by the likes of W3C and OASIS are datasets;
4. government guidelines like eGIF are datasets.

1 and 2 feel just about OK. 3 & 4 feel wrong.

One way out might be to broaden the scope of dcat:Dataset but that again 
feels wrong and I can hear understandable cries of anguish coming from 
Galway at the very idea.

Your other points hinge on resolving this one.

Phil.








>
>> - removing all references to RADion in ADMS (remember ADMS has
>> implementations already, hence people screaming for the RADion schema
>> to be put in place);
>
>> - replacing the RADion properties used by ADMS directly (like
>> radion:distribution) with dcat versions such as dcat:distribution. An
>> example of the impact there is that it would mean adding a new range
>> statement as it currently has a range of dcat:Distribution - is having
>> two ranges for a property a good thing?;
>
> If the corresponding adms class were subClassOf dcat:Distribution then
> no additional range declaration would be required.
>
> There is no problem with a property have multiple range statements, but
> it does have a well defined semantics (that the effective range is the
> intersection of the two stated ranges). Whether that is a problem
> depends on what makes the adms class different from a dcat:Distribution.
>
> Dave
>
>
>

-- 


Phil Archer
W3C eGovernment
http://www.w3.org/egov/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1

Received on Thursday, 27 September 2012 13:25:05 UTC