New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use Case: Allow extra types on root dataset #182
Labels
use-case
A (potential) use-case for ROLite creation, consumption or integration
Milestone
Comments
ptsefton
added
the
use-case
A (potential) use-case for ROLite creation, consumption or integration
label
Dec 6, 2021
We're doing this now - does anyone object to it being made legit in the spec? |
I think it should be allowed. This is also useful for profiles #153 if we want to type as |
This was referenced May 18, 2022
ptsefton
added a commit
to ptsefton/ro-crate
that referenced
this issue
Nov 23, 2022
…ct#182 which was agreed but not actioned
stain
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 23, 2023
Changed to text to allow multiple types on root - as per #182 which w…
ptsefton
added a commit
to ptsefton/ro-crate
that referenced
this issue
May 2, 2023
…advice on how to reference DOIs to reflect the latest recommendation from Science on Schema.org
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
As a profile designer I want to have additional types on the root dataset to simplify writing profiles - the current use case is wanting to be able to double up with "RepositoryCollection" (pcdmCollection) or "RepositoryObject" (pcdm:Object) to distinguish between collections and "actual data".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: