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

Bernadette, George,

Based on this thread, can I ask for an agenda slot in the coming weeks 
to discuss this, please.

My reading is that the instincts of all of us - me included - is that 
RADion is something we should try and do without. However, it does seem 
to perform the role for which it was defined. I see two decision points 
for the WG:

1. Keep or kill off RADion - this thread seems to be tending towards 
keeping it although Chris suggests a different route to counteract 
Martin's keep it (data point: Martin is also familiar with the third 
vocab, ADMS.SW, that I play down here because it's not a GLD work item).

2. If keep:
- publish schema/namespace doc (I'll update it inline with the 
clarifications I'm making to ADMS and the Legal Entity vocab);
- introduce subclass relationships where relevant in DCAT which is 
otherwise unaffected, i.e. there would be no need to declare the RADion 
namespace when using DCAT.
- That's IT. Nothing more to do - this doesn't become a new GLD deliverable.

3. If abolish:
- answer Martin's issues;
- update ADMS;
- point to DCAT within ADMS to say that where a Semantic Asset can also 
be considered a dataset, it is good practice to include that in the data.

Phil.


On 27/09/2012 14:59, Dave Reynolds wrote:
> On 27/09/12 14:43, Phil Archer wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 27/09/2012 14:27, Dave Reynolds wrote:
>> [..]
>>
>>> OK. What about the other way round. Are all datasets semantic assets?
>>>
>>
>> Well, again, it depends on the dataset. I can think of datasets that
>> could be considered as semantic assets such as NAPTAN and the Companies
>> House data. These are used as reference points within other datasets.
>> But Suffolk County Council spending data for 2012 Q1... ?
>
> Sure it is, if I'm using that to make a decision and want to refer to it
> as an officially sanctioned asset I can use for that decision making.
>
> There's an underlying issue here that the notion of "semantic asset" is
> not intrinsic to the thing. What makes something a semantic asset is
> that some authority wants to declare it as such by putting it in an
> approved repository. But one person's semantic asset is another persons
> useless pile of insufficiently structured irrelevant data.  So it's
> really a relationship, not a class.
>
> That said, it sounds like there's enough differences between what dcat
> wants to talk about and what adms wants to talk about that radion has a
> role at least as an articulation of a mapping.
>
> Dave
>
>
>

-- 


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

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

Received on Thursday, 27 September 2012 16:11:20 UTC