W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > December 2015

Re: ACTION-94 a few thoughts

From: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 13:36:43 +0100
To: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>, Bill Roberts <bill@swirrl.com>
Cc: Bart van Leeuwen <Bart_van_Leeuwen@netage.nl>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-id: <5668205B.800@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
On 02/12/2015 17:49, Jeremy Tandy wrote:

> [snip]
> FWIW, note that the catalogue discovery mode (search for the record,
>  read the record to find the access point. query the access point) is
>  covered by the DWBP. Furthermore, I'd be bold enough to say that
> data that's accessed only from an opaque service endpoint is not
> really on the web. I think to be "on the web" the data needs to be
> visible to (and crawlable by) search engines.

I tend to share Jeremy's concern.

I see three main requirements / recommendations here:

1. HTML should be supported, via HTTP conneg, as an alternative format 
for CSW output (metadata records and, possibly, also service capabilities).

2. This HTML representation should be optimised for indexing - it should 
embed the metadata themselves, as RDFa, Microformats, etc.

3. Metadata records should use HTTP URIs to enable link crawling.

About (1) & (2), this is actually related to UCR #4.43:


And this is what has been done, e.g., in the GeoDCAT-AP API, which is 
able to return CSW records in different RDF serialisations, including 
HTML+RDFA - see, e.g.:


About (3), this can be partially addressed by mapping, e.g., ISO code 
list values to URIs, but it eventually requires HTTP URIs to be used in 
the original records.

Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2015 12:37:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 2 September 2016 12:03:10 UTC