Closed bertvannuffelen closed 3 months ago
This is reopening issue #177
We support the alignment.
Technically you are right about the backward incompatibility, but this problem is already adressed by the locn ontology:
The usage notes of https://www.w3.org/ns/locn#locn:geometry allow nearly everything as range:
I think we should use this flexibillity and recommend a locn:geometry
representation that can be proccessed by the EDP for visualization.
The semantical alignment is addressed. For processing capabilities by EDP, it might be a topic for the upcomming geoDCAT-AP aligment.
Observation
Proposal To align with DCAT 3.0
Impact Backward incompatibility with DCAT 2.0 (Literal -> Class)