From an enduser perspective, having only an access url and a license seems too limited as information to evaluate if the distribution is/could be of interest.
Component
CodeCategory
improvement
Login or
create an account to comment.
From an enduser perspective, having only an access url and a license seems too limited as information to evaluate if the distribution is/could be of interest.
Comments
Which other properties would you want to see as mandatory?
Please note that the Distribution is associated with the Dataset where title, description and publisher are mandatory. So the user knows what the dataset is, and then sees in the Distribution where to get it and under which conditions.
To be clear: not wanting to reopen this.
Just wanting to clarify it.
I'm not interested in dowloading a distribution if the distribution is in a file format I don't have the knowledge, tools, ... for.
Examples is existing portals: Metastock, mdb.
With the spec as it is now I can only discover that after having downloaded it.
Related question:
How can I choose between multiple distributions which one suits me best?
Paul, you make a valid point. I have no problem re-opening the issue. Others may want to express an opinion. e.g. to make dct:format mandatory.
I would make dct:format recommended, but not mandatory. The format of a distribution is something not required / foreseen in many metadata schemas - e.g., in INSPIRE metadata, this information is not required.
I would also suggest considering the possibility of making dct:description as a recommended property for distributions. In my experience, information about the format of a distribution is often included in its description (of course, not in machine-readable format).
Consideration
Making this change for description does not affect any conformance rules.
Proposed resolution
Make dct:description a recommended property for Distribution
Proposed action
Update specification, adding section on recommended properties for Distribution in section 7.4 and moving dct:description from section 7.4.2 to the new section.
Consideration
Making this change for format does not affect any conformance rules.
Proposed resolution
Make dct:format a recommended property for Distribution
Proposed action
Update specification, adding section on recommended properties for Distribution in section 7.4 and moving dct:format from section 7.4.2 to the new section.
Both issues (description and format) resolved at meeting 18 July 2013, see report at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/document/dcat-application-profile-wg-virtual-meeting-2013-07-18.
Resolution implemented in draft 0.04 at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/document/dcat-application-profile-data-portals-europe-draft-final-text