[ckan-discuss] Multiple package schemas

[Richard Cyganiak]

Hi Tim,

On 6 Oct 2010, at 22:53, Tim McNamara wrote:
>> But 'schemas' still might want to modify the behaviour of some of  
>> the core
>> fields:
>>
>> - add a note underneath the field
>> - provide a selection of choices for the resource format field
>> - provide a number of checkboxes to add specific tags with special  
>> meenings
>> - ...
>>
>
> Would this level of flexibility be desirable?

The proposal above doesn't add flexibility, it *restricts*  
flexibility, by encouraging certain pre-defined values for formats and  
tags (which currently are completely unrestricted), and by providing  
additional documentation for fields that are currently not documented/ 
explained at all in the form.

Please have a look at [1] -- this is how we currently ask people in  
the Linked Data community to contribute their work to CKAN. Being able  
to present all these guidelines directly in the form would be a *huge*  
step forward.

Best,
Richard

[1] http://esw.w3.org/TaskForces/CommunityProjects/LinkingOpenData/DataSets/CKANmetainformation


> It may it things very
> difficult to build applications on the basis of CKAN's packages if  
> they have
> different structures. I prefer the idea of a common set of  
> information that
> is fixed with possible extensions. I think there should be a strong
> community push to keep to the common set unless there are compelling  
> reasons
> (necessity) to add an extension.
>
> Tim.