Open clange opened 2 years ago
Reading through https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/InformationModel/issues/521, I think the requirement is not to replace the RDFS terms but to enhance them with additional attributes to give the instances also "title"/"description" capabilities. On the Java-side, we already have an artificial top class, from which all other classes inherit, and this class can have these attributes (Option a). Or, Option b, we can simply add the two properties to all "lower" classes.
Please note that #504 replaces all existing ids:title
with dct:title
, and ids:description
with dct:description
. This (following this comment and the subsequent discussion) is probably already fully supported by the Java Lib.
What is the remaining task here? Do you want to enforce everything in the IDS to have at least one dct:title
and dct:description
or shall this be only mandatory for some but optional for most others (as we already do it currently)?
Hi @JohannesLipp, I think the output should be a bit different, using https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/InformationModel/blob/refactorIDSModel-enhancement/model/infrastructure/AppStore.ttl as an example:
ids:AppStore
a owl:Class ;
rdfs:subClassOf ids:Connector;
rdfs:label "App Store"@en ;
rdfs:comment "Secure platform for distributing Data Apps."@en.
dct:title a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
rdfs:label "title" ;
rdfs:domain ids:AppStore ;
rdfs:range xsd:string ;
.
dct:description a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
rdfs:label "description" ;
rdfs:domain ids:AppStore ;
rdfs:range xsd:string ;
.
And that for every class that is "important enough". Then of course dct:title rdfs:domain ids:AppStore
is a bit stupid because it would need to be repeated for every class... Maybe:
dct:title a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
rdfs:label "title" ;
rdfs:domain owl:Class ;
rdfs:range xsd:string ;
.
dct:description a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
rdfs:label "description" ;
rdfs:domain owl:Class ;
rdfs:range xsd:string ;
.
or some other way to connect it "as high as possible" at the abstract classes we use?
The precise task might be: Scan through all important classes and properties in the IDS infomodel and ensure that they have both dct:title
and dct:description
. In most cases, we could copy the values from rdfs:label
and rdfs:comment
, respectively.
(awaiting answer in #521 )
In the same direction as discussed in #521 it turns out that for the Eclipse Dataspace Connector each term in the infomodell needs to have (in conformance with DCAT) a
dct:title
and adct:description
. So far we have had a good coverage, but usingrdfs:label
andrdfs:comment
. The decision to be taken (@sebbader what do you think from a Java perspective?) is to either replace the RDFS properties, or to introduce the DCAT/DC properties additionally, redundantly. The latter should then be supported by automated generation or at least validation to avoid out-of-sync issues.