[ckan-discuss] package relationships

Thu Feb 17 13:43:35 GMT 2011

* [2011-02-17 12:13:05 +0000] David Raznick <kindly at gmail.com> écrit:
] 
] Do we have a proposed *perfect* ontology for ckan (or dataset related
] metadata in general).  i.e one we can head towards if there were no
] constraints?

I wouldn't go so far as to say it is "perfect" but the
DCat model (understood as an abstract model and not as
an RDF vocabulary) a good candidate. It pulls in the
very standard dublin core for basic metadata and adds
bits for describing a data catalogue. If you hook in
the open-provenance model (which will typically refer
to datasets but could also refer to catalogue entries
in the case that we care about metadata provenance as
opposed to data provenance) then we have that as well.

Considering these things as abstract models they 
would be quite straightforward to implement in a 
traditional ORM type way...

Cheers,
-w
-- 
William Waites                <mailto:ww at styx.org>
http://river.styx.org/ww/        <sip:ww at styx.org>
F4B3 39BF E775 CF42 0BAB  3DF0 BE40 A6DF B06F FD45