– DRAFT –
Dataset Exchange Working Group Teleconference

<RiccardoAlbertoni> /me alejandra we are meeting on meet.google.com/ywn-krwh-pjp

<RiccardoAlbertoni> PROPOSED: approve last meeting minutes https://www.w3.org/2021/04/28-dxwgdcat-minutes

Minutes of last meeting

<RiccardoAlbertoni> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

<alejandra> +0 (absent)

+1

Resolution: approve last meeting minutes https://www.w3.org/2021/04/28-dxwgdcat-minutes

<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2021.05.26

approve agenda

<AndreaPerego> +1

+1

<RiccardoAlbertoni> +1

Resolution: Agenda approved

Accessibility Considerations

<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1358

<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/1373

RiccardoAlbertoni: request to add specific section, and I have drafted a pull request (early draft)

<AndreaPerego> Link to relevant section: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/dcat-issue-1358/dcat/index.html#accessibility

RiccardoAlbertoni: Matches what was asked for (superficially) - but should we go further
… haven't added any detailed guidance

<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/dcat-issue-1358/dcat/index.html

RiccardoAlbertoni: Any views or comments

AndreaPerego: Somewhat puzzled by the request, have tried to think of alternatives, didn't come up with anything

AndreaPerego: Is this really in scope? Is it more about publishing (so DWBP rather than DCAT)

AndreaPerego: Only thing we have in the requirements is a request to add thumbnail (for geospatial)

AndreaPerego: Perhaps we could consider how the metadata could be read?

DaveBrowning: Concerned that we will need to do something in the examples

RiccardoAlbertoni: They have only really asked for something equivalent to what we did for Security etc

alejandra: we probably need to go back to them for a bit more guidance/clarification
… have looked for other examples/standards (eg JSON-LD) and can't find anything

+1 to suggestion that we ask,

AndreaPerego: We can point back to our draft section....

AndreaPerego: We already have descriptions (textual) for some of the URLs(e.g for distributions) in the metadata....

<alejandra> adding some other of my comments from before - perhaps we could consider a new property on the distributions for the alternative text

<alejandra> ... but as the issue is around a section at the same level of Security and Privacy, perhaps they want us to raise awareness of data accessibility by mentioning it, as Riccardo did in the proposal

Action: RiccardoAlbertoni to ask for feedback in https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1358 on accessibility section

<trackbot> Created ACTION-450 - Ask for feedback in https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1358 on accessibility section [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2021-06-02].

<RiccardoAlbertoni> Issues #1364 and #1153 related to dcat:theme

<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1364

Issues on dcat:theme

<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1153

RiccardoAlbertoni: Some discussion on changing the range of dcat:theme

<RiccardoAlbertoni> see example, in https://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-skos-reference-20090818/#L896

RiccardoAlbertoni: some concern that even if allowed by REC that we are putting as object both instance and class
… not clear on the impact
… tried with Protege and didn't cause a problem

RiccardoAlbertoni: 2 possible solutions - either use owl classes as object or alternatively use union of skos concept and owl class...
… could be useful to clarify that both could be expected

<AndreaPerego> I think this issue is more or less about the same point: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1362

alejandra: Interesting issue. We do need to clarify. If we allow owl classes then we need to explain that its okay by usage note or other comment
… discussion on dcterm:subject is also relevent. (History of the evolution of DC is kind of lost)
… Need to make this clear

AndreaPerego: Yes, it needs to be clarified. Looking at how its used - theme tends to be thematic 'environment'; 'public sector', essentially the main topic
… Generally we try to be inclusive and different groups do different things
… They have their own ways and we risk creating confusions.
… Could include owl individuals, but as said - people are using DCAT as owl ontology, but although we do use owl DCAT wasn't designed to be used like that
… A lot of these issues could be resolved via SHACL or profile ...
… We do have conficting issues raised
… Different communities pulling in different directions

RiccardoAlbertoni: People are confusing that range: is really guidance not a constraint

RiccardoAlbertoni: To summarise - is the feeling that we should explain more?

AndreaPerego: We risk upsetting one party if we change/say anything, so we need to something more

alejandra: If we add clarification, but ranges are guidance. Are you suggesting adding to RDF?

RiccardoAlbertoni: I was suggesting both, but now think we should go for the lightweight touch of note only

<alejandra> https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#ex-conformance-test-results-earl

alejandra: Example 48...

<alejandra> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/836b201802c0859c20bd066816e0c2cebb239f12/dcat/rdf/dcat3.ttl#L1034

<alejandra> so, is this a bug? https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/836b201802c0859c20bd066816e0c2cebb239f12/dcat/rdf/dcat3.ttl#L1034

<AndreaPerego> Issue about dc:subject and dcat:keyword: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/175

RiccardoAlbertoni: So looks like the ttl needs fixing.
… What should we be adding to the examples to explain?

alejandra: I'll raise an issue for the errata

RiccardoAlbertoni: I'll put together a draft for the clarification and we can review. Key is we don't want to change the range of dcat:themes
… yet

<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/1370

<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/164

alejandra: Thought we weren't doing the alignments?

AndreaPerego: Part of the idea was to see if people would want to collaborate on alignments, but not in the standard. Do we want an 'official' place?

RiccardoAlbertoni: Might be a good idea. github wiki or W3C?

<alejandra> I will follow up - and I agree to put the link for reference (but won't go into the spec)

AndreaPerego: Main collection point is on the W3 page

AOB: none