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
Revision to the versioning section in DCAT3 FPWD #1295
Conversation
Nice work guys. Reads well. (also the dataset series section) |
|
||
<aside class="ednote"> | ||
<p>This is a new draft for discussion on versioning support in DCAT.</p> | ||
<p>Compared with the first draft in [[VOCAB-DCAT-3-20201217]], this section has been revised to focus specifically on versions derived from the revision of a resource, and by following the [[PAV]] approach for the specification of version chains and hierarchies - previous, next, current, last version.</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Limiting the scope in this way is pragmatic and sensible.
dcat/index.html
Outdated
<li><code>dcat:previousVersion</code> (equivalent to <a data-cite="?PAV#d4e459"><code>pav:previousVersion</code></a>)</li> | ||
<li><p><code>dcat:hasVersion</code> (equivalent to <a data-cite="?PAV#d4e395"><code>pav:hasVersion</code></a>), plus the following additional properties:</p> | ||
<ul> | ||
<li><code>dcat:isVersionOf</code> (inverse of <code>dcat:hasVersion</code>);</li> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In general inverse-properties are to be avoided (you can always add the reverse triple to a graph) but occasionally there is a pretty compelling case from usage. This is probably such.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree. In the text I tried to make it clear that the only key properties are dcat:hasVersion and dcat:previousVersion, whereas the other ones should be used if needed by the relevant use case.
dcat/index.html
Outdated
<li><a data-cite="VOCAB-ADMS#adms-last"><code>adms:last</code></a> is defined as <q>A link to the current or latest version of the Asset</q>, whereas in [[PAV]] the current and latest versions of a resource may be different, and link to by using different properties.</li> | ||
</ul> | ||
<p>Moreover, although the definitions of the [[VOCAB-ADMS]] properties states explicitly that they are meant to be used for "versions", they are subproperties of the corresponding terms in [[XHTML-VOCAB]], where they are used to link resources in a collection (e.g., the set of pages of a Web site). E.g., the definition of <a data-cite="XHTML-VOCAB#last"><code>xhv:last</code></a> reads as follows: <q>last refers to the last resource in a collection of resources.</q>.</p> | ||
<p>Based on that, in this draft, [[PAV]]-equivalent properties are used for versions, whereas the [[VOCAB-ADMS]] ones are used for dataset series (<a href="#dataset-series"></a>). Properties <code>dct:hasVersion</code> / <code>dct:isVersionOf</code> are not used.</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Will you include owl:equivalentProperty
axioms in the RDF?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
BTW - I agree with not using PAV directly. It was nicely designed but has rarely been used, and thus would be an unnecessary and out-of-date dependency. I was on a call with Stian Soiland-Reyes and he expressed some surprise that there was continued interest in PAV. So I think we can assume that PAV itself is no longer a going concern.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's very useful, @dr-shorthair .
About your first question, equivalence in the RDF can be stated either formally or informally. What would you suggest?
dcat/index.html
Outdated
<div class="issue" data-number="1271"></div> | ||
|
||
<aside class="ednote"> | ||
<p>This draft proposes the definition of a new property <code>dcat:version</code>, to use instead of <code>owl:versionInfo</code> of the first draft.</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good.
Thanks, Simon. I've just added a new section, to explain how DCAT can be used to describe versioning complementarily with other vocabularies. Could you please have a look at it? |
Dear all,
It is very good that such details are added.
I am wondering if it is possible to also add some detail on the linkage between DCAT and PROV-O.
It is true that there are some hints in the document on multiple places, but it would be nice to state in on place the overall picture. For instance Resource, Dataset, Distribution, .... are members of prov:Entity and explain in which cases etc. if there is some difference
Prov also has wasRevisionOf and some related so these can be mentioned in the tale under the versioning
Best regards
Chavdar
|
Thank Andrea, for preparing this PR. I agree on the line of extending the DCAT support taking into account PAV's equivalent terms and I like the way the versioning is presented. I report some observations that have crossed my mind reading the draft. I hope they might help the discussion in the next DCAT call.
|
@griddigit , a comparison with PROV has been added via commit 3b9371f - see https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/dcat-versioning-v2/dcat/index.html#versioning-complementary-approaches |
All the discussed revisions have been implemented. Unless there are any objections, I would merge this PR, and create a new one for future changes. |
thanks @andrea-perego - I agree it should be merged as comments have been addressed. |
Yes, please merge this. |
This PR includes a new draft for discussion on versioning support in DCAT, as per ACTION-438.
Preview: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/dcat-versioning-v2/dcat/index.html#dataset-versions
Diff: https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fw3c.github.io%2Fdxwg%2Fdcat%2F&doc2=https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/dcat-versioning-v2/dcat/index.html#dataset-versions
Summary of changes:
Compared with the first draft in the DCAT3 FPWD, the versioning section has been revised to focus specifically on versions derived from the revision of a resource, and by following the approach of the PAV ontology for the specification of version chains and hierarchies (the version history).
In particular, the introductory text has been revised according to the new scope, the section on version types has been removed, and a new section has been added to describe how to specify relationships between versions, whereas backward compatibility aspects, originally included in §10.2 Version information have been removed (see #1258). Moreover, a new section has been added at the end to compare the DCAT versioning approach with those used in OWL and DCTERMS.
The other sections include only editorial changes.
EDNOTEs have been added to highlighted the relevant revisions.
NB: All the properties described in this section are yet to be added to §6. Vocabulary specification and to the RDF definition of DCAT.