- From: Fadi Maali <fadi.maali@deri.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 01:08:41 +0100
- To: Public GLD WG <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Deirdre Lee <deirdre.lee@deri.org>, Makx Dekkers <makx@makxdekkers.com>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, John Erickson <erickj4@rpi.edu>, Hadley Beeman <hadley@linkedgov.org>, Bernadette Hyland <bhyland@3roundstones.com>
Hello all, I would really still love to see DCAT moving on the Rec track if possible. AFAIK, the main problem is the lack of compliant implementations (data). This is mainly for two reasons: 1. There exists a number of plans to provide DCAT data but none is out yet. For examples: -EU: DCAT Application Profile https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat_application_profile/asset_release/dcat-application-profile-data-portals-europe-final - Spain: there is an official decision by the government that all datasets must be published using DCAT https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat_application_profile/news/spanish-government-publishes-metadata-specification-describing-p - Belgium: see a tweet from Paul Hermans https://twitter.com/PaulZH/status/385684667388919808 2. Existing data uses older version of DCAT and are non-compliant therefore. I have looked into a number of available DCAT data and summarised the results at: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/DCAT_Implementations All data I was able to find is non-compliant. In addition, With OKFN having their own JSON-based dataset description recommendation and the Schema.org Dataset extension, it is harder to find DCAT data. It would be great if we can think of a set of actions that we might do in order to DCAT on Rec track. Could we provide implementations ourselves? What other items are required to keep DCAT on Rec track? -------------------------------------------------- Fadi Maali PhD student @ Insight Galway (formerly DERI) Irish Research Council Embark Scholarship holder http://www.deri.ie/users/fadi-maali
Received on Thursday, 17 October 2013 00:09:19 UTC