Closed riccardoAlbertoni closed 3 years ago
This looks clean and sensible to me
@andrea-perego can you check the rephasing of the note before definingdcat:theme
meets the expectation you have expressed in the last DCAT teleconference? Feel free to rephrase it, otherwise. Thanks.
Thanks, @riccardoAlbertoni .
+1 from me. I just suggested an editorial change.
Thanks, Andrea. I have accepted your suggestion.
@davebrowning , @pwin , @agbeltran , Is this PR ok for you?
An alternative solution to PR #1380
This PR drops the range for
dcat:theme
, but explicitly defining it asowl:ObjectProperty
as suggested by @dr-shorthair in https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1364#issuecomment-843616224Considering that
dcterm:subject
has been recently changed to let both literals and URI, by definingdcat:theme
s as anowl:ObjectProperty
and dropping thedcat:theme
's range,dcat:theme
would still restrictdcterms:subject
to URIs, whiledcat:keyword
might restrictdcterms:subject
to literals.This would also limit the automatic inference of
skos:Concept
, which could be potentially problematic when applied to instances whose classes are defined disjoint fromskos:Concept
.