search

w3c / dxwg

Data Catalog Vocabulary (DCAT)
https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/
Other
139 stars 55 forks source link

Update metadata of the RDF definition of DCAT3 #1508

Closed andrea-perego closed 1 year ago

andrea-perego commented 2 years ago

Some of the metadata of the RDF definition of DCAT3 are not up to date, and some are missing.

As a first proposal, the following revisions have been included in this PR:

The proposal includes also some editorial and bug fixes:

andrea-perego commented 2 years ago

@plehegar , in the RDF definition of DCAT3 we specified W3C as publisher,:

https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/9d1fea9e04d0a6953549c2dfda3995cbc3011da0/dcat/rdf/dcat3.ttl#L117

The question is whether it is fine we use https://www.w3.org/ as the URI for W3C - as far as I know, there is no RDF description associated with it, or embedded in the corresponding HTML page.

In other words, which is the "official" URI to be used when referring to W3C in an RDF graph?

danbri commented 2 years ago

https://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q37033

This has tons of useful rdf factoids nearby!

On Thu, 19 May 2022 at 22:05, Andrea Perego @.***> wrote:

@plehegar https://github.com/plehegar , in the RDF definition of DCAT3 we specified W3C as publisher,:

https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/9d1fea9e04d0a6953549c2dfda3995cbc3011da0/dcat/rdf/dcat3.ttl#L117

The question is whether it is fine we use https://www.w3.org/ as the URI for W3C - as far as I know, there is no RDF description associated with it, or embedded in the corresponding HTML page.

In other words, which is the "official" URI to be used when referring to W3C in an RDF graph?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/1508#issuecomment-1132207357, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABJSGPB2AFOGQTQGKQZZGLVK2UJHANCNFSM5VZRQEAA . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

plehegar commented 1 year ago

@plehegar , in the RDF definition of DCAT3 we specified W3C as publisher,:

https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/9d1fea9e04d0a6953549c2dfda3995cbc3011da0/dcat/rdf/dcat3.ttl#L117

The question is whether it is fine we use https://www.w3.org/ as the URI for W3C - as far as I know, there is no RDF description associated with it, or embedded in the corresponding HTML page.

In other words, which is the "official" URI to be used when referring to W3C in an RDF graph?

https://www.w3.org/ seems to be fine to use for the publisher. However, if you expect to find RDF or something at the end of that URL, it will not work. We'd have to create the RDF first and publish it as a separate URL.

pchampin commented 1 year ago

I notice that https://www.w3.org/ uses content-negotiation, so adding an RDF "view" of it would probably be feasible?

NB: if we did that, we would still need to distinguish the web-page (https://www.w3.org/) from the organization (https://www.w3.org/#this).

riccardoAlbertoni commented 1 year ago

I notice that https://www.w3.org/ uses content-negotiation, so adding an RDF "view" of it would probably be feasible?

NB: if we did that, we would still need to distinguish the web-page (https://www.w3.org/) from the organization (https://www.w3.org/#this).

I have implemented the changes discussed in the last DCAT subgroup meeting (see https://www.w3.org/2022/11/29-dxwgdcat-minutes). To be consistent with the resolution (https://www.w3.org/2022/11/29-dxwgdcat-minutes#r04), we do not distinguish between the web page (https://www.w3.org/) and the organisation (https://www.w3.org/#this).

@pchampin: Do you still think that distinction is pivotal?

pchampin commented 1 year ago

@riccardoAlbertoni

@pchampin: Do you still think that distinction is pivotal?

It really depends on who is going to consume that RDF metadata, and how pedantic they will be about it. In order to be future-proof, I would refrain from conflating the webpage and the organization. I'll make a suggestion in my review.

riccardoAlbertoni commented 1 year ago

@riccardoAlbertoni

@pchampin: Do you still think that distinction is pivotal?

It really depends on who is going to consume that RDF metadata, and how pedantic they will be about it. In order to be future-proof, I would refrain from conflating the webpage and the organization. I'll make a suggestion in my review.

Ok, let's try to be future proof, no objection from my side.

riccardoAlbertoni commented 1 year ago

@pchampin I have accepted your suggestions and updated the .jsonld and .rdf vocabulary serialisations. If you can approve the PR, I would merge it, also considering that quite a large number of interventions have been piled into this PR, and keeping track of the changes is getting complex.