dcat dataset

[marqh]

hello API Records folks

i've been reading with interest the progress being made here

I'd like to raise a topic of DCAT alignment, which is explicitly called out in various places (and is great, btw)

I note that DCAT version 2 is referenced, and that there is extensive use of the term Dataset

The interesting facet for me is that in the developing DCAT 3 there is a new entity: a Dataset Series
https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat-3/#Class:Dataset_Series

This is a dcat:Dataset: dcat:DatasetSeries rdfs:subClassOf dcat:Dataset

This gives a layer of abstraction that is targeting scenarios which seem really closely related to the work on API records, such as :

Usage note: | Common scenarios for dataset series include: time series composed of periodically released subsets ... ...

it seems to me there is particular value in considering whether the datasets being presented within this standard are often usefully modelled as DatasetSeries

One useful facet, for example, is that a Dataset declares its presence within a DatasetSeries
this makes DatasetSeries really useful for scenarios where the published entity is continually expanding as new elements are produced

my organisation are investigating the DCAT DatasetSeries as the way to model concepts such as 'the weather observations from this set of sites'
this then enables each set of real measurements to be a specific Dataset, with explicit time & data values
These Datasets then declare their membbership to the existing DatasetSeries, which is generally the entity that we want to catalogue to enable access to the Datasets as desired, based on API calls, filtering and so on

So, i am interested in the relationship between API Records and DCAT and whether the DCAT-3 DatasetSeries is a really valuable aspect that should be considered within API Records

many thanks
marqh

[cnreediii]

@marqh - The concept of a dataset series fits nicely with many geo info communities, such as parcel boundaries over time or the requirement for versioning in a CDB datastore.

[pvretano]

14-NOV-2022: Not clear from the issue what changes are being requested in the document. @tomkralidis will followup with @marqh to get more feedback.

[tomkralidis]

@marqh

• would there be any normative change required here? One could use the record type (with an enumerated list of resource types) from core already, would that help?
• so in this case, each site is a dataset? Unrelated to OARec proper, but related to our domain (weather/climate/water), we could consider the WMO WIGOS metadata FacilitySet model as a link relation in the core record as well (see related issue as well at WIGOS metadata integration: referencing a set of stations in a WCMP2 record based on a network of stations wmo-im/wcmp2#19)

[pvretano]

31-MAR-2023: There is now a GeoDCAT SWG being created at OGC (see charter here: https://portal.ogc.org/files/?artifact_id=103396&version=2) so anything related to GeoDCAT will be handled there and we can simply reference anything we need here.

[ByronCinNZ]

The formal vote on the GeoDCAT swg will happen in a couple of weeks. Danny and I are planning for a first formal meeting shortly after a positive vote and then a face to face in Huntsville. Looking for interested people to join this work. Let us know. CheersByronSent from my iPhoneOn 1/04/2023, at 2:35 AM, Panagiotis (Peter) A. Vretanos ***@***.***> wrote: 31-MAR-2023: There is now a GeoDCAT SWG being created at OGC (see charter here: https://portal.ogc.org/files/?artifact_id=103396&version=2) so anything related to GeoDCAT will be handled there and we can simply reference anything we need here. —Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>