search

w3c / dxwg

Data Catalog Vocabulary (DCAT)
https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/
Other
145 stars 46 forks source link

ID37 Europeana profile ecosystem: representing, publishing and consuming application profiles of the Europeana Data Model (EDM) #8

Open kcoyle opened 7 years ago

kcoyle commented 7 years ago

Discussed at F2F day 2 (July 18, 2017) but not resolved. See minutes:

https://www.w3.org/2017/07/18-dxwg-minutes

Main issue was that of "nesting profiles" - efficient but complex if nesting profiles owned by others; could change in unexpected ways. Also the question of whether profiles can narrow but not expand vocabulary semantics.

Makx reports that DCAT-AP is stand-alone, copying in those elements of DCAT that it will use, and adding others.

Some comments from minutes:

maybe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_over_inheritance is another way to couch the issues? antoine: relationship between profiles needs to be more flexible/fluid dsr: More like delegation of responsibilities phila: ODRL has inheritance but answer is prohibit/allowed with default if indeterminate a question of use cases for knowing details about profiles in DCAT. A clean model would only require the minimum information for handing over to the profile which would be responsible for handling any sub-profiles. phila: in this space we would need some conflict resolution ... we'd have to prove it.... alejandra: in most cases profiles would just be 'leaves' - but looking across profiles is still a need (recording a related if old technology: http://www.rddl.org/ was a design for xml namespaces that made a simple HTML page - a bit like a 'profile' - with pointers to machine formats like DTDs, XSDs etc.) kcoyle: Do profile definers find that they are re-using existing elements or extending.
andrea-perego commented 3 years ago

@kcoyle , would you like to revive this issue? Otherwise, I propose we close it.

andrea-perego commented 3 years ago

Unless there are any objections, I propose we close this issue.

aisaac commented 3 years ago

Has it been copied in another github repo? It was quite useful as a requirement / use case. And I'm not sure how it's met with the current PROF config (ping @nicholascar @rob-metalinkage ). This is typically the kind of thing that would have motivated a Guidance doc.

kcoyle commented 3 years ago

There are a number of issues that discuss "inheritance", which I think is the same as the question of "nesting" that came up at the meeting. I do consider that an open issue, and one that would need to be discussed in a guidance document. Perhaps we need to re-state the question and consolidate the discussion, with links to the various open or closed issues where this has come up.

aisaac commented 3 years ago

@kcoyle yes this would make sense. This specific issue doesn't focus on inheritance only, but it would certainly reach this stage quickly ;-)

rob-metalinkage commented 3 years ago

This is evidence of the need for inheritance in some form - it belongs to the UCR process and has IMHO been dealt with. DXWG doesnt have a deliverable for the modelling of Europeana, so we can close it. If someone undertakes this and identifies any specific issues they should be raised as new issues under PROF with detailed evidence. If all is good then adding to implementation reports would be a Good Thing.

kcoyle commented 3 years ago

@rob-metalinkage I wasn't suggesting that we keep an open issue for Europeana - that was just a use case that brings up the topic. I also don't think this is specifically a PROF issue. There is a general question of how a profile relates to the vocabularies that it reuses, and what it would mean to create a profile of a profile (as with DCAT). So I think this is very much a guidance question that should be addressed in the guidance document. Once done, PROF could refer back to that (or not, if you wish). (Note that this issue has surfaced in the work we are doing in Dublin Core so it does seem to be a "universal" when one tries to work with application profiles.)

rob-metalinkage commented 3 years ago

Fair enough. I think you also had some views on some of the nuanced versions. I have come across requirements for a "collection of options" flavour of super-profile and we haven't addressed recommendations vs mandatory implications either. Happy to take on board new requirements for prof.