joinup as implementation of ADMS

[bertvannuffelen]

In the ADMS-AP a mapping from the joinup concepts to ADMS are made.

Questions arise if the joinup concepts are used according to the meaning of ADMS?

Are all collections repositories of adms:assets?
Are all solutions adms:assets?
Are all releases adms:assets?
Are all distributions adms:distibutions?

If not then which one are? Are they distinguishable from the others? Does the Joinup interface makes a difference between them?

[bertvannuffelen]

This link shows a nice confusion: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/solution/joinup-source-code/distribution/joinup-source-code-v1561

The word "asset" in this does not correspond to the meaning of adms:Asset, but it should be 2 separate adms:AssetDistibution 's.

[aidig]

Here are some examples from JoinUps current implementation showing the DCAT-mappings to join-ups concepts of collection, solution, release and distribution:

eg.
(THE COLLECTION = dcat:Catalog)
http://data.europa.eu/w21/bf8ff383-be51-4d25-ba57-f4fbb194be08
dc:title "Semantic Interoperability Community (SEMIC)"@en ;
a dcat:Catalog ;
dcat:dataset http://data.europa.eu/w21/26fe5e8d-9b68-45a3-93c7-93b6bb72c53a
(...)

(THE SOLUTION= dcat:Dataset)
http://data.europa.eu/w21/26fe5e8d-9b68-45a3-93c7-93b6bb72c53a
dc:title "Core Public Service Vocabulary"@en ;
dc:type http://data.europa.eu/dr8/CoreDataModel ;
a dcat:Dataset ;
dc:hasVersion http://data.europa.eu/w21/3991f546-8ccc-46da-a0d5-c0f8150d38a5,
'(..)

(THE RELEASE= dcat:Dataset)
http://data.europa.eu/w21/3991f546-8ccc-46da-a0d5-c0f8150d38a5
a dcat:Dataset ;
dc:title "Core Public Service Vocabulary"@en ;
owl:versionInfo "1.01" ;
dc:isVersionOf http://data.europa.eu/w21/26fe5e8d-9b68-45a3-93c7-93b6bb72c53a ;
dcat:distribution http://data.europa.eu/w21/1e1acc8c-7bec-4709-9430-e26598eb682d,
'(..)

(THE DISTRIBUTION= dcat:Distribution)
http://data.europa.eu/w21/1e1acc8c-7bec-4709-9430-e26598eb682d
dc:title "CPSV RDF"@en ;
a dcat:Distribution ;
dcat:accessURL "http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/file-dereference/15218"^^xsd:anyURI ;
'(..)

[aidig]

On https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/solution/asset-description-metadata-schema-adms-revision/discussion/cr21-asset-remove-admslast-admsnext-admsprev-properties-and-replace-them-property-dctisversionof (Sun, 10/01/2016) Makx DEKKERS suggests using prov:Collection to model solutions instead of dcat:Dataset

"If it is really necessary to distinguish the Solution level from the Version level, one possible solution could be to model the Solution as a prov:Collection http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#Collection which is defined as "an entity that provides a structure to some constituents, which are themselves entities". You could then define the properties you need to describe the Solution, and link to the Versions using either dct:hasPart or prov:hadMember, and link from the Version to the Solution with dct:isPartOf or prov:wasMemberOf."

Would this be considered in a future ADMS Application Profile for JoinUp or is the above 3-tier solution-release-distribution still to be modelled as dcat:Dataset-dcat:Dataset-dcat:Distribution?

[bertvannuffelen]

The DCAT community has clarified the definition & usage of the term dataset in w3c/dxwg#1221.

The conclusion is that despite one can have intuitively a narrow understanding of dataset, it should be considered broader. However as one can see in this application in ADMS-AP and the JOINUP extension to it, it is not a trivial application. It requires careful followup on the definitions, and maybe in this case subclassing would have made the reading of the machine readeable data much clearer. See #28 on choosing explicit subclassing or reification.

Without additional knowledge creating SHACL shapes for solutions and releases are not that trivial, as one can only detect the kind via the direct relationship to a catalog or an indirect relationship.