Meeting minutes
<riccardoAlbertoni__> PROPOSED: approve last meeting minutes https://
approve last meeting minutes
<riccardoAlbertoni__> +1
+1
<DaveBrowning> +1
Resolution: approve last meeting minutes https://
approve agenda
<riccardoAlbertoni__> https://
riccardoAlbertoni__: Do we want to do any changes?
AndreaPerego: Not me
DaveBrowning: Fine with me
Should we move future teleconference on ZOOM or others systems?
Teleconf system
riccardoAlbertoni__: Should we move away from WebEx?
… Asking every time the host code is not very handy.
… Should we use zoom instead?
<riccardoAlbertoni__> PROPOSED: we move to zoom for future teleconferences (so that we do not have to ask for webex host code every meeting).
+1
<DaveBrowning> +1
<riccardoAlbertoni__> +1
Resolution: we move to zoom for future teleconferences (so that we do not have to ask for webex host code every meeting).
Issues related to dcat:theme and dcat:keywords
dcat:keyword subproperty of dcterms:subject, Issues https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1374 and https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/175 :
riccardoAlbertoni__: Because now dcterms:subject has no range restriction, it could be also used by literals, so the issue can be probably dropped.
AndreaPerego: Not sure that this implies that dcterms:subject could be used with literals.
riccardoAlbertoni__: Yes, there are two issues here. The first one is about removing the subproperty relation.
AndreaPerego: I think the range can be safely dropped. I'm very much concerned about interoperability issues if we have properties that can be used with both literals and URI refs.
riccardoAlbertoni__: Yes, but on the DCAT side we specialise this, so we shouldn't have such issues.
AndreaPerego: Looking at the usage note in DCTERMS, mentioned by Antoine, I don't see an explicit statement about the fact that dcterms:subject can be used directly with literals.
riccardoAlbertoni__: So, let's keep on discussing this on GH.
:coherence between dcat:themeTaxonomy and dcat:theme. (Issues https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1364 and https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1153 )
riccardoAlbertoni__: The issue is about consistency of the range restrictions of dcat:theme and dcat:themeTaxonomy.
… Last time we decided to add a note about compatibility of owl:Class's and skos:Concept's.
<riccardoAlbertoni__> https://
riccardoAlbertoni__: There was also a discussion, where Simon was proposing to drop the range restriction, and explain the recommended use in the usage note.
<riccardoAlbertoni__> https://
riccardoAlbertoni__: Do you have any preference between the two PRs?
AndreaPerego: Fine for me to drop the range restriction and make them owl:ObjectProperty's, but we should make it clear that the use of these properties has not changed, and that we are just fixing a bug.
riccardoAlbertoni__: So we can add a note to make it clear.
<DaveBrowning> +1 to all of that
riccardoAlbertoni__: There's an ancillary issue - in the RDF we defined owl:ObjectProperty's, but we didn't make this explicit.
… Should we make the spec more consistent with the RDF.
https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1362 - Following the recommendation to use dct:type prevents using SKOS-based reference datasets or standard RDF typing
AndreaPerego: We can add a row "Type" saying whether this is a owl:DatatypeProperty or a owl:ObjectProperty.
riccardoAlbertoni__: Let's go that way.
riccardoAlbertoni__: Issue #1362 was basically addressed by the DCMI Usage Board. So Antoine proposes to close it.
… Should we close it, or go on with the discussion?
AndreaPerego: I think we can add a comment saying that, unless there are still open issues, we will close it.
[meeting adjourned]