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

Distribution schema [RDIS] #55

Closed
jpullmann opened this issue Jan 18, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

7 participants
@jpullmann
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jan 18, 2018

Distribution schema [RDIS]

Define a way to include identification of the schema the described data conforms to

This may include rich information via extensions points, URI templates and parameters, dimensions and subsetting operations, dereferenceable identifiers of service behaviour profiles and canonical identifiers of well-known web service interfaces (e.g. OGC - WFS, WMS, OpenDAP, REST apis).

Such a description may be provided through identifier of a suitable profile that defines interoperability conditions the distribution conforms to.


Related requirements: Profiles listing [RPFL] Dataset aspects [RDSAT] 
Related use cases: DCAT Distribution to describe web services [ID6] Summarization/Characterization of datasets [ID33] Data access restrictions [ID17] Template link in metadata [ID22] 
@makxdekkers

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jan 19, 2018

The European DCAT-AP (https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/release/dcat-ap-v11) specifies the use of dct:conformsTo (http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-conformsTo) with usage note "This property refers to an established schema to which the described Distribution conforms." This seems like a solution to the issue as defined in the first line.
The remainder of the text in the issue description could be part of a usage note.

@dr-shorthair

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 15, 2018

Notwithstanding little evidence of usage in SEMICeu/DCAT-AP#25 I agree that this looks an eminently practical solution which could be promoted into DCAT.

Proposal: add dct:conformsTo to the list of properties recommended for use with dcat:Distribution https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#class-distribution

@andrea-perego

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 16, 2018

Proposal: add dct:conformsTo to the list of properties recommended for use with dcat:Distribution https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#class-distribution

+1 from me.

BTW, another supporting use case is 5.18 Modeling service-based data access (which however is not linked from this requirement).

andrea-perego added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 16, 2018

Added UC18 to RDIS
The missing link is noted in #55 (comment)

@dr-shorthair dr-shorthair added this to In progress in DCAT revision Apr 26, 2018

@dr-shorthair dr-shorthair moved this from In progress to To do in DCAT revision Apr 26, 2018

@dr-shorthair

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 5, 2018

Schematic representation is approximately parallel with FRBR 'Expression' - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_Requirements_for_Bibliographic_Records

In contrast, syntactic representation, media-type or format can be compared with FRBR 'Manifestation'.

@dr-shorthair

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 9, 2018

Proposed resolution in #297

@jakubklimek

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 9, 2018

+1. In SEMICeu/DCAT-AP#25 I added my arguments why the discussion there is invalid. This property is crucial.

@dr-shorthair

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 13, 2018

Additional changes to #297 after discussion https://www.w3.org/2018/07/12-dxwgdcat-minutes#x07
should resolve the issue per the resolution in that meeting.

@agbeltran agbeltran closed this Jul 19, 2018

DCAT revision automation moved this from To do to Done Jul 19, 2018

davebrowning added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 18, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.