Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

VOID vs DCAT targeting? #67

Closed
VladimirAlexiev opened this issue Mar 27, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #83
Closed

VOID vs DCAT targeting? #67

VladimirAlexiev opened this issue Mar 27, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #83
Labels
bug Something isn't working documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@VladimirAlexiev
Copy link

I understand that RML wants to reuse existing vocabularies for targeting:

An external vocabulary such as DCAT, VoID, SD is allowed here. If a target cannot be accessed with existing vocabulary, a custom vocabulary can be used

The spec gives many examples of targeting void:Dataset.dataDump vs dcat:Dataset.distribution.accessURL, the first one at https://kg-construct.github.io/rml-io/spec/docs/#target-examples.

But what is the value of this? These examples do the same thing (target a file):
so why confuse users (and indirectly ask developers to do more work) by giving both examples?

@DylanVanAssche
Copy link
Collaborator

But what is the value of this

Showing that the specifications are not limited by a specific vocabulary. All these examples are not a MUST in the specification, you can use any specification you want for access.

so why confuse users (and indirectly ask developers to do more work) by giving both examples?

For the sake of clarity we should indeed just drop VOID. DCAT coverages more.

@DylanVanAssche DylanVanAssche added bug Something isn't working documentation Improvements or additions to documentation labels Mar 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants