Closed cezio closed 6 years ago
@cezio @etj I added some minor comments but, I need some time to properly review this, will try to do it next week.
As with all DCAT issues available documentation is very sparse and all suggestions I found seem to point that dct:hasPart
is a property of catalog (ie Catalog -> catalog, not dataset -> catalog) so I wonder if there is another way to describe this relation better. In principle I'm happy to store provenance information in the datasets extras though.
@metaodi do you guys have any experience with this?
@amercader with this implementation, in DCAT output we'll have Catalog -> hasPart -> Catalog -> dataset indeed, as per DCAT documentation. We're storing the catalog info in datasets' extras in order not to modify the dataset model.
I created a new PR https://github.com/ckan/ckanext-dcat/pull/101 containing the squashed commits of this PR, plus some more cleanup and docs.
@amercader @cezio pls close this PR and refer to #101 instead: it's up to date with this PR, and includes some more fixes and improvements, and also follows the recommendations in review (such as https://github.com/ckan/ckanext-dcat/pull/100#discussion_r149423850)
Closed in favour of #101
this implements https://github.com/ckan/ckanext-dcat/issues/96