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

Relation of various Agent classes used throughout the specification #112

Open
jakubklimek opened this issue Mar 8, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
Labels
release:3.0.0 Actively being worked on for GeoDCAT-AP 3.0.0 status:fixed Resolution applied in draft type:improvement Improvement of current handling of a problem webinar:2024-04-23 To be discussed in the 2024-04-23 webinar

Comments

@jakubklimek
Copy link
Contributor

jakubklimek commented Mar 8, 2024

Problem statement
There are different classes for Agents used throughout the GeoDCAT-AP 2.0.0 specification. These include:

  • dct:Agent - as range of agent role properties (publisher, creator, ...) in Bindings overview - probably coming from the Dublin Core definitions, which, however, since 2020 only state dcam:rangeIncludes instead of defining a rdfs:range. This may be therefore changed to foaf:Agent
  • foaf:Agent - as range of agent role properties (publisher, creator, ...) in Specification part, e.g. as range of Catalog publisher
  • prov:Agent - as range of prov:agent in Attribution

What are the relations among the occurences of those classes in the specification? What are the expected properties, when only foaf:Agent has its section in the specification?

dct:Agent definition:

A resource that acts or has the power to act.

foaf:Agent definition:

The Agent class is the class of agents; things that do stuff.

prov:Agent definition:

An agent is something that bears some form of responsibility for an activity taking place, for the existence of an entity, or for another agent's activity.

Proposal

  1. Replace dct:Agent with foaf:Agent to be consistent, also with DCAT-AP (DCAT only recommends foaf:Agent as range), and
  2. Add an explanatory text on the difference or similarity of foaf:Agent and prov:Agent and the expectations on each one, e.g. regarding usage of properties. Suggest double typing of prov:Agent with foaf:Agent or a specific subclass.
@jakubklimek jakubklimek added type:improvement Improvement of current handling of a problem release:3.0.0 Actively being worked on for GeoDCAT-AP 3.0.0 webinar:2024-04-23 To be discussed in the 2024-04-23 webinar status:resolution-proposed Resolution proposed and will be accepted before the next webinar labels Mar 8, 2024
@jakubklimek jakubklimek added the next-webinar To be discussed in the next webinar label Mar 21, 2024
@jakubklimek jakubklimek added status:resolution-provided Resolution statement present, not yet applied in draft and removed status:resolution-proposed Resolution proposed and will be accepted before the next webinar labels Apr 16, 2024
@jakubklimek jakubklimek removed the next-webinar To be discussed in the next webinar label Apr 25, 2024
@jakubklimek jakubklimek added status:fixed Resolution applied in draft and removed status:resolution-provided Resolution statement present, not yet applied in draft labels Jun 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
release:3.0.0 Actively being worked on for GeoDCAT-AP 3.0.0 status:fixed Resolution applied in draft type:improvement Improvement of current handling of a problem webinar:2024-04-23 To be discussed in the 2024-04-23 webinar
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant