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
identifiers #223
Comments
Dear community, a proposal for the guidelines to comment on can be found at: As during the last webinar no agreement was on the status of this proposal it is shifted to a future release. |
The Czech data catalog implements what is to be avoided by the guidelines - it mints an IRI for a harvested dataset regardless of its original IRI. If there was an original IRI, it is preserved in This is not to argue that the approach is correct, but I would like to take this opportunity to mention arguments that led us to this implementation that I did not find mentioned in the guidelines.
|
@jakubklimek, I understand the arguments. And exactly because of these experiences, the guidelines propose that harvesters and portal owners should ensure that all identifiers are included in adms:identifier. It does not impact any portal user experience nor publisher (only technical support to the harvesting community), but the potential is high. |
This issue will be closed as an reference to the assessment/proposal is in the specification. The assessment/proposal has not been included in full but in this way readers of the specification can better find it and take the considerations into account in their implementations. |
This is an broad issue to capture questions and opinions on identifiers. During the webinar of 10 march 2022 the WG discussed on the role of dct:identifier and adms:identifier in identifying datasets throughout harvesting of catalogues.
To streamline the discussion, the WG agreed with the view that dct:identifier is the identifier assigned by the "owner/first publisher" of the dataset. This removes an ambiguity in the definition of dct:identifier which could be also interpreted as the identifier assigned by the catalogue it is currently part of.
This issue is to collect the community feedback on this topic. We will also provide a coherent proposal based on the WG discussion that has taken place.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: