[ckan-discuss] package relationships

Thu Feb 17 13:03:59 GMT 2011

Il giorno mer, 16/02/2011 alle 19.50 +0000, David Raznick ha scritto:
> 
> 
> The question to you is.  Do you think this way of grouping resources
> meets your requirements? 

David,
I don't know, but much depends on whether different resource groups can
have different attribution (and possibly, licensing) attributes.
Derivative datasets will need to be attributed in first place to their
"remixers". I like to think of CKAN as a "data-space warping device"
that encourages remixing of existing open data instead of just recording
it.

So far, the current relationships (i.e. not the ones you are describing)
are not bad IMHO, but I don't have so many requirements about describing
linked datasets for example, which instead seems an important part of
their current implementation (see also Rufus's comments in this thread).

Ciao
steko

-- 
Stefano Costa
Open Knowledge Foundation Italia http://it.okfn.org/
http://okfn.org/ · http://www.opendefinition.org/ 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/ckan-discuss/attachments/20110217/9ec462dc/attachment.pgp>