Re: ISSUE-36 (Kill Radion?): Should RADion be killed off? [DCAT]

Hi Phil,

I think that keeping RADion as planed is a good idea. I have a use
case related to RADion usage which may help.

Right now, we are modeling a RADion-based vocabulary to describe the
process of PSI and Apps re-use. The Basque Government issued a Decree
to  increase usage of open source code and open data. All the new
developments for the government will require (among other tasks) to
analyze the existing open source modules / open data sets / other
reuse projects in order to avoid duplicate works. The Basque
Government is developing a platform to support this process and, also,
all the related information will be published in RDF.

The solution would have 3 kind of asset repositories:
 - for Open Data (based on DCAT),
 - for Open Apps (based on ADMS.SW)
 - for Reuse Processes (??)

In this case, it makes sense that DCAT Datasets, ADMS.SW open-source
Packages, and the processes with documents are subclases of
RADion:Asset. The same with their Repositories and Distributions. This
hierarchy is natural using the RADion approach.

Best regards,

Martin

-- 
Martin Alvarez Espinar
W3C Spain Office Manager        tel.:+34 984390616
http://www.w3c.es/Personal/Martin   mlvarez@w3.org

Received on Thursday, 27 September 2012 14:12:53 UTC