Skip to content
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

Range of dcat:CatalogRecord's primaryTopic dcat:Resource instead of dcat:Dataset #92

Closed
espinr opened this issue Oct 7, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@espinr
Copy link

espinr commented Oct 7, 2019

The foaf:primaryTopicproperty of catalogue record should have dcat:Resource as range instead of dcat:Dataset(it might also be a catalogue or a data service).

@akuckartz
Copy link

Really? Not skos:Concept ?

@andrea-perego
Copy link

andrea-perego commented Oct 7, 2019

Just to note that, in DCAT2, no range is specified for foaf:primaryTopic, and the original range in FOAF is foaf:Thing.

@espinr
Copy link
Author

espinr commented Oct 8, 2019

Just to clarify my comment. It's regarding the latest version of DCAT-AP (2.0.0 page 13). Among the mandatory properties for CatalogRecord, there is primaryTopic with range dcat:Dataset, and defined as This property links the Catalogue Record to the Dataset described in the record. Following the current model, and under this context, the primary topic of a catalog record may refer to data resources: a Dataset (as it is), but also a DataService or a Catalog.

So, yes, it's to make this contraint looser.

@bertvannuffelen
Copy link
Contributor

resolution: range is adapted.

@bertvannuffelen bertvannuffelen moved this from resolution proposed to handled in dcat-ap release 2.0 Nov 15, 2019
@bertvannuffelen bertvannuffelen moved this from handled to releaseTagged in dcat-ap release 2.0 Nov 15, 2019
@bertvannuffelen bertvannuffelen moved this from releaseTagged to closed in dcat-ap release 2.0 Nov 25, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
No open projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants