search

SEMICeu / ADMS-AP

This is the issue tracker for the maintenance of ADMS-AP
4 stars 1 forks source link

adms:Asset definition #25

Open bertvannuffelen opened 4 years ago

bertvannuffelen commented 4 years ago

from the ADMS vocabulary definition (https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-adms/#the-primary-concepts) as definition & repeated in the ADMS release 2.0.1 document as usage note, the formal definition of adms:Asset is

Abstract entity that reflects the intellectual content of an Asset and represents those characteristics that are independent of its physical embodiment. This abstract entity combines the FRBR18 entities work (a distinct intellectual or artistic creation) and expression (the intellectual or artistic realization of a work). The physical embodiment of an Asset is called an Asset Distribution. A particular Asset may have zero or more Distributions.

bertvannuffelen commented 4 years ago

According to the introduction in https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-adms the definition is:

Semantic Assets (or just 'Assets'), that is, highly reusable metadata (e.g. xml schemata, generic data models) and reference data (e.g. code lists, taxonomies, dictionaries, vocabularies) that are used for eGovernment system development [ TOGD ].

bertvannuffelen commented 4 years ago

According to the mapping to DCAT (https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#Class:Dataset) the formal definition is

A collection of data, published or curated by a single agent, and available for access or download in one or more representations.

Actually the current ADMS is based upon DCAT 1.0 (https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-vocab-dcat-20140116/#class-dataset)

A collection of data, published or curated by a single agent, and available for access or download in one or more formats.

bertvannuffelen commented 4 years ago

The discussion in issue #12 showed that the above setting is at least confusing, if not ambiguous.

So we should align on some "reuse principles" for URIs and the human readable definitions. I also created them as separate issues to enable targetted discussion. I propose that this issue is used to explore the definition of adms:Asset. And come to an agreed new definition.

bertvannuffelen commented 4 years ago

principle 1: the formal definition associated with the term is the only one to consider. Context explanation in introduction may clarify the global setting, but is not should not be taken as part of the discussion for reuse. If the context is relevant it should be part of the formal definition.

for discussion use #26

bertvannuffelen commented 4 years ago

principle 2: If a URI from another vocabulary is reused then its definition has priority over the local definition. The reusing vocabulary should make sense when using the URIs formal definition.

for discussion use #27

bertvannuffelen commented 4 years ago

principle 3: if a class is reflecting a particular subset of items from a class in an external vocabulary then it should be considered to explicit subclass it instead of reusing the URI. Otherwise consider reification via introducing a property with a codelist that identifies the case.

note: many high abstract vocabularies already introduce reification properties.

for discussion use #28

bertvannuffelen commented 4 years ago

principle 4: An application profile of X should show its relationship with X explicitly.

Eg. https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-adms/#the-adms-domain-model shows the ADMS model, but it lacks any reference to its base, namely DCAT.

for discussion use #29