[datahub-discuss] Datahubio outdated datasets

[Michel Dumontier]

+1 i think "discontinued" is fine.

m.

On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Timothy Lebo <lebot at rpi.edu> wrote:
> Thanks for outlining the tradeoffs, Ivan.
>
> In the case of http://datahub.io/dataset/riese, I would certainly hope it is
> dropped from the lodcloud group.
> That would “deprecate” it quite a bit.
>
> Adding a tag “discontinued” would be a lightweight option to establish the
> distinction you identify.
> Since all of the lodcloud group datasets were also tagged “lod”, then we’d
> still have the “discontinued” “lod” datasets with a combination of two tags.
> I don’t think that the “tag space size” and capitalization concerns outweigh
> this option.
> “discontinued” I hope is self-explanatory enough to not need a description.
>
> I’m still confused between the “organizations replaced groups” features of
> CKAN, so I’d recommend avoiding those options.
> Also, a group/organization involves more overhead than the “dead” datasets
> deserve, I would think.
>
> -Tim
>
>
> On Aug 18, 2014, at 3:56 PM, Ivan Ermilov <earthquakesan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Tim,
>
> I thought about this. In that case it should be clearly possibly to see the
> border between the historical metadata (which point to non-existent
> datasets) and the actual metadata. The three possible ways at the moment
> are:
> 1. Special tag
>    + easy to add (everyone can add tags to his/her datasets)
>    - tag space is quite big http://datahub.io/api/3/action/tag_list
>    - tag descriptions are somewhat lacking
> http://datahub.io/api/3/action/tag_show?id=access-commercial (is it possible
> to have some more metadata for tags?)
>    - "Historical" and "historical" are two different tags (i.e.
> case-sensitive) - users will have several tags in the end
>
> 2. Special group
>    + no groups at the moment http://datahub.io/api/3/action/group_list
>    + group can have a description
> http://demo.ckan.org/api/3/action/group_show?id=data-explorer
>   + user can only choose from existing ones it seems (can't test it, because
> no groups exist on datahubio)
>    - I couldn't add a group to my own dataset
>    - was it deprecated in favor of "organizations"?
>
> 3. Key/value pair (custom field)
>   - No description for the field
>   - Case-sensitive and need typing from dataset maintainer.
>   - I created a key/value pair for my dataset, now can't delete it. Looks
> like bug =\
>
> Therefore, I would go for creating a special group (organization?) for the
> historical datasets, if we want to keep them.
>
> Kind regards,
> Ivan.
>
>
> 2014-08-18 18:06 GMT+02:00 Timothy Lebo <lebot at rpi.edu>:
>>
>> Richard, Ivan,
>>
>> Is it appropriate to *delete* these?
>> Perhaps just tag and remove from groups as appropriate?
>> It would be nice to have some historical perspective on outdated LOD
>> datasets.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>> On Aug 18, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Richard Cyganiak <richard at cyganiak.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Ivan,
>>
>> I can help with deleting those datasets.
>>
>> Could you send a list of the dataset URLs to the mailing list, along with
>> a statement of justification for each (e.g., “project page states that the
>> project is discontinued”)?
>>
>> Best,
>> Richard
>>
>>
>> On 18 Aug 2014, at 15:58, Ivan Ermilov <earthquakesan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm working on LODStats portal and checking the dataset availability and
>> metadata consistency. Some datasets are not available due to server errors
>> (basically hosting for dumps is down), they may appear online again. But
>> some of them are really dead, for instance this one:
>> http://datahub.io/dataset/riese (if you try to navigate to the resource,
>> you will see that the project is discontinued).
>>
>> My question is if it's possible to delete this dataset and some other in
>> the future (I will make a list of fixes and can report it to the mailing
>> list). If deletion is not an option, than there should be the way to fix it
>> (maybe someone will volunteer to contact maintainers and then host RDF).
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Ivan Ermilov.
>> _______________________________________________
>> datahub-discuss mailing list
>> datahub-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/datahub-discuss
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> datahub-discuss mailing list
>> datahub-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/datahub-discuss
>>
>>
>> Timothy Lebo
>> lebot at rpi.edu
>> https://impactstory.org/TimothyLebo
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Timothy Lebo
> lebot at rpi.edu
> https://impactstory.org/TimothyLebo
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> datahub-discuss mailing list
> datahub-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/datahub-discuss
>