Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Example files: non-consistent namespace declaration for "mobilityDCAT-AP:" #66

Open
peterlubrich opened this issue Dec 5, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@peterlubrich
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi there,
I was told that our example files have a non-consistent namespace declaration:

In the TTL versions, we have:
@prefix mobilitydcatap: <http://w3id.org/mobilitydcat-ap#>
See here.

In the RDF/XML versions, we have:
xmlns:mobilitydcatap="https://w3id.org/mobilitydcat-ap#"
See here.

@marioscrock @Daham-Mustaf : Please check which is correct: "http" vs. "https"? Thanks

@peterlubrich peterlubrich changed the title Example files: non-consistent namespace declaration for "mobilityDCAT-AP" Example files: non-consistent namespace declaration for "mobilityDCAT-AP:" Dec 5, 2024
@marioscrock
Copy link
Contributor

marioscrock commented Dec 5, 2024

Hi,

both are correctly redirected to the specification. Teoretically, the one to be used is the one in the serialisation files of the specification, i.e., http://w3id.org/mobilitydcat-ap#.
Cf. https://mobilitydcat-ap.github.io/mobilityDCAT-AP/drafts/latest/serialisationFiles/mobilitydcat-ap.ttl

However, for controlled vocabularies we are using IRIs with https (e.g., https://w3id.org/mobilitydcat-ap/application-layer-protocol), therefore a decision should be made to harmonize the approach.

@marioscrock
Copy link
Contributor

On the ReSpec page, we also mention the one with https, so I would suggest updating the serialisations and examples accordingly. In this way, we use the same approach of the controlled-vocabularies.

image

@peterlubrich Here a # is missing at the end.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants