Meeting minutes
<riccardoAlbertoni_> https://
<riccardoAlbertoni_> PROPOSED: approve last meeting minutes https://
+1
<riccardoAlbertoni_> +1
<nobu_ogura> +1
RESOLUTION: approve last meeting minutes https://
riccardoAlbertoni_: Any additions to agenda?
… <silence>
<riccardoAlbertoni_> https://
Tag review (at above issue)
riccardoAlbertoni_: Issue explains the background. Includes the observation that RDF lists aren't normally hierarchical
… now have a response from Dan Brickley (see action)
<riccardoAlbertoni_> me https://
<discussion and ideas around how this might be made to work, and what the benefits might be
… draft reply has been put together explaining our perspective
riccardoAlbertoni_: What do people think?
DaveBrowning: The draft seems sensible to me. We may be missing something, but it doesn't seem natural to do this
… if we are missing something then we'd obviously consider it.
riccardoAlbertoni_: Perhaps we should discuss in the plenary or with Pierre-Antoine
<riccardoAlbertoni_> https://
riccardoAlbertoni_: seems useful to do this
<riccardoAlbertoni_> If representations of a dataset are available for each language separately, define an instance of dcat:Distribution for each language and describe the specific language of each distribution using dcterms:language (i.e., the dataset will have multiple dcterms:language values and each distribution will have just one as the value of its dcterms:language property).
Issue 1532
<riccardoAlbertoni_> If representations of a dataset are available for each language OR GROUP OF LANGUAGES separately, define an instance of dcat:Distribution for each language OR GROUP, and describe the specific language of each distribution using dcterms:language (i.e., the dataset will have multiple dcterms:language values and each distribution will have just one as the value of its dcterms:language property).
riccardoAlbertoni_: Perhaps this issue really means we should be more explicit?
DaveBrowning: Looks like worth preparing a PR
riccardoAlbertoni_: Okay - I'll do that and reply to the issue as well
<riccardoAlbertoni_> Attribution does not cover most MARC relators and other roles https://
Attribution
riccardoAlbertoni_: This created a long discussion during June (when the WG was on break).
… this possibly needs some reflection. Its a DCAT2 feature so any work on this would probably need to be prioritised as part of future work