Closed mikel-egana-aranguren closed 2 years ago
Hay un problema con los nodos anónimos:
El mismo estandar DCAT recomienda no usar nodoso anonimos (https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat-2/#dcat-rdf):
RDF allows resources to have global identifiers (IRIs) or to be blank nodes. Blank nodes can be used to denote resources without explicitly naming them with an IRI. They can appear in the subject and object position of a triple [RDF11-PRIMER]. For example, in many actual DCAT catalogs, distributions are represented as blank nodes nested inside the related dataset description. While blank nodes can offer flexibility for some use cases, in a Linked Data context, blank nodes limit our ability to collaboratively annotate data. A blank node resource cannot be the target of a link and it can't be annotated with new information from new sources. As one of the biggest benefits of the Linked Data approach is that "anyone can say anything anywhere", use of blank nodes undermines some of the advantages we can gain from wide adoption of the RDF model. Even within the closed world of a single application dataset, use of blank nodes can quickly become limiting when integrating new data [LinkedDataPatterns]. For these reasons, it is recommended that instances of the DCAT main classes have a global identifier, and use of blank nodes is generally discouraged when encoding DCAT in RDF.
Incluso aparece un ejemplo de accrualPeriodicity, que es el que apunta a un nodo anonimo en Open Data Euskadi, que apunta a un nodo con URI:
Posible solución para los nodos anónimos: https://github.com/opendata-euskadi/Linked-Data-fase-2/commit/19ede05a538eb94042a6da4e64aae3ce2f0dc993
Al finas se van a producir dos DCATs grandes:
Naturaleza dual de los DCAT de Open Data Euskadi
Cada ficha Open Data Euskadi tiene un DCAT que cumple dos funciones a la vez:
Procedimiento
Para cada caso hay que hacer un procedimiento diferente:
http://id.euskadi.eus/graph/DCATOpenDataEuskadi
http://id.euskadi.eus/graph/DCATOpenDataEuskadi
.Consultas