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

different uses of dcat:catalog (membership or part of interpretation) #1599

Open
bertvannuffelen opened this issue Apr 26, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
dcat future-work issue deferred to the next standardization round

Comments

@bertvannuffelen
Copy link

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?

@nicholascar
Copy link
Contributor

"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:

 {RESOURCE}
     dcterms:isPartOf [
         dcat:hadRole :home ;
         prov:entity {CATALOG} ; 
     ] ;
. 

We are trialling a series of Catalogue Roles in this vocab: https://data.idnau.org/v/vocab/vcb:cat-roles.

Would the use of qualified isPartOf roles be helpful here?

@rob-metalinkage
Copy link
Contributor

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.

@bertvannuffelen
Copy link
Author

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.

@riccardoAlbertoni
Copy link
Contributor

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

I am marking this as future work.

@riccardoAlbertoni riccardoAlbertoni added the future-work issue deferred to the next standardization round label May 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
dcat future-work issue deferred to the next standardization round
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants