You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In DCAT-AP this issue has been raised on the usage of dcat:catalog. SEMICeu/DCAT-AP#292.
In the harvesting use case, the aggregating catalogue A will harvest a catalogue B.
What is then the expected representation of catalogue to indicate that B has been harvested by A .
:B a dcat:Catalog;
dcat:dataset [ :dsB; :cB ] .
:dsB a dcat:Dataset.
:cB a dcat:Catalog.
:A1 a dcat:Catalog;
dcat:catalog :B ;
dcat:dataset [ :dsB; :cB ] .
:A2 a dcat:Catalog;
dct:hasPart :B ;
dcat:catalog :cB ;
dcat:dataset :dbB .
case A1: add :B as value dcat:catalog
case A2: :B is a part of the aggregated catalogue and all catalogues provided as catalogued resources in B should go in dcat:catalog.
Which pattern should be followed to create an aggregated catalogue from the harvested catalogues while keeping a trace to the orginal catalogues in the aggregation?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
"keeping a trace to the original catalogues" seems to be a requirement here and I've seen it elsewhere a lot. I deal with large, aggregated catalogues that harvest from other catalogues but often do a poor job of indicating the home locations of individual resources.
So we have been using qualified relationships from resources back to catalogues like this:
Why not just use PROV natively?. Define subclasses of prov:Activity for federation. As a profile of PROV which can be used in a formal profile of DCAT. This way you get time for free if you need to know when.
I like to bring the discussion back to the question: what is the semantics behind dcat:catalog? (also read issue #1598 for another perspective on the semantics of this property.)
Lets first define the proper use of the existing properties, before discussing extending DCAT.
Managing the harvest catalog might open the door to more elaborate requirements than those considered by DCAT 2 and DCAT 3, i.e., distinguishing between harvested and non-harvested catalogs, which was not a requirement at the time the property was specified. [see https://github.com//issues/182 and then, https://github.com//issues/1156]
As a source of further context, we might refer to the DCAT_AP discussion SEMICeu/DCAT-AP#292
In DCAT-AP this issue has been raised on the usage of dcat:catalog. SEMICeu/DCAT-AP#292.
In the harvesting use case, the aggregating catalogue A will harvest a catalogue B.
What is then the expected representation of catalogue to indicate that B has been harvested by A .
Which pattern should be followed to create an aggregated catalogue from the harvested catalogues while keeping a trace to the orginal catalogues in the aggregation?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: