W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-wg@w3.org > March 2013

Re: Conflicts between Cube and DCAT in metadata properties (was: Re: AW: AW: [QB] Last Call document draft)

From: John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 08:15:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC1Gg8QaJKGsD4d5ryheN4iyq4c2QzNEAyv8xeDW8V1g+kqjCQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Cc: Benedikt Kaempgen <kaempgen@fzi.de>, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, Government Linked Data Working Group <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
cygri wrote:

> Proposed steps for aligning the two specs:
>
> - recommend dc:title/description on qb:DataSet in addition to rdfs:label/comment

+1...Names are important; dc:title and dc:description will likely lead
to stronger, less ambiguous values for these fields.

> - recommend dc:issued instead of dc:date for creation date in Data Cube

+1...dc:issued implies "first appeared" and is better than "created,"
"published," etc....Also, dc:date could refer ambiguously to other
dates in the lifecycle.

> - Add a note to beginning of Data Cube Section 9 that says that other documents such as DCAT have additional recommendations for metadata properties.

+1...Good to specify connections between the recommendations like this.

> - make dcat:theme a subproperty of dc:subject in DCAT

+1...dc:subject is more intuitive and should be primary. dcat:theme
seems more dependent on interpretation...

> 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.

Yes. Thanks, Richard!


-- 
John S. Erickson, Ph.D.
Director, Web Science Operations
Tetherless World Constellation (RPI)
<http://tw.rpi.edu> <olyerickson@gmail.com>
Twitter & Skype: olyerickson
Received on Friday, 8 March 2013 13:16:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:38 UTC