- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 11:58:31 +0000
- To: Benedikt Kaempgen <kaempgen@fzi.de>, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, Government Linked Data Working Group <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
Benedikt, Dave, DCAT and Data Cube unfortunately disagree somewhat on the metadata properties that are to be used. I think it's worth still fixing those disagreements now. On 8 Mar 2013, at 11:14, Benedikt Kaempgen wrote: >> Ah, good point. Of course that section was originally written before >> DCAT. I'm not sufficiently familiar with DCAT to suggest what to put >> here. DCAT seems like it would be more used to describe a catalogue >> entry that would reference a Data Cube rather than a Data Cube >> itself. DCAT has both dcat:CatalogRecord and dcat:Dataset. The second is thought to be the dataset itself. >> Richard - if you feel there is a useful reference to DCAT to be made >> here I'm happy for you to make that change and will trust your >> judgement on it. > > Richard told me recently that in his opinion, a qb:DataSet is a dcat:Dataset. If so, we should either say so formally in the RDF and/or informally in prose. Well, it is my view that qb:DataSet is a subset of dcat:Dataset. But if someone thinks it better to have one more triple between the two entities that explicates the relationship, then I have no problem with that. The metadata properties recommended in both documents are somewhat different: Data Cube | DCAT -------------------------+------------------------- rdfs:label | dc:title rdfs:comment | dc:description dc:date | dc:issued, dc:modified dc:subject->skos:Concept | dcat:theme->skos:Concept dc:publisher->foaf:Agent | dc:publisher->foaf:Agent Data Cube is a bit self-contradictory here, it says “We recommend use of Dublin Core Terms for representing the key metadata annotations commonly needed for DataSets.” but then uses rdfs:label and rdfs:comment in preference of DC, perhaps to be consistent with the many other places in Cube where these properties are used. Since a dataset can be thought of as an abstract "document", "work" or "publication", the use of DC seems more appropriate to me here. Cube also implies that dc:date is the creation date, which is not quite correct. dc:date could be any date in the lifecycle of the resource. Proposed steps for aligning the two specs: - recommend dc:title/description on qb:DataSet in addition to rdfs:label/comment - recommend dc:issued instead of dc:date for creation date in Data Cube - Add a note to beginning of Data Cube Section 9 that says that other documents such as DCAT have additional recommendations for metadata properties. - make dcat:theme a subproperty of dc:subject in DCAT The result would be that if you follow the DCAT recommendations, you end up with something that matches the Cube recommendations, except for the use of a subproperty in the case of dcat:theme vs dc:subject. Best, Richard
Received on Friday, 8 March 2013 11:58:55 UTC