[Recommendation] Remove old documentation on DOI-do and infopolicy websites

[jbrown-xentity]

This information will help the Core Team resolve issues with the draft DCAT3-US application profile. So we can track all issues, please submit different issues in separate issue tickets. The Core Team will review and adjudicate the submitted issue and provide comments on this ticket indicating steps taken to address the issue as submitted.

Name: James Brown

Affiliation: GSA - data.gov

Type of issue: General Comment (Recommendation)

Issue:
Previous work: https://infopolicy.github.io/dcat-us/

Remove websites with old documentation that is no longer correct: DOI-DO and infopolicy websites. The former we'll need to work with DOI, the latter with OMB.

[lzolly-usgs]

Agree with this recommendation; however, additional cleanup is required on the documentation before it is marked as final. There are numerous discrepancies across the documentation (e.g., between the summary table and the detailed descriptions of properties) regarding cardinality and other details that need to be adjudicated. DOI has documented these in the attached spreadsheet.

DCAT-US 3 GitHub Discrepancies_EISC.xlsx

[chris-macdermaid]

This will be needed for vendor support.

Esri's statement:

We’ve heard questions from agencies about DCAT‑US 3. The specification is currently in Candidate Recommendation status, and DCAT‑US 3 is on the ArcGIS Hub roadmap. Once the standard is approved, our expectation is that DCAT‑US 3 support will be available in ArcGIS Hub within three months.

https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/arcgis-hub/data-management/arcgis-hub-catalog-feeds-support-dcat-rss-ogc#next

[jbrown-xentity]

This will be needed for vendor support.

Esri's statement:

We’ve heard questions from agencies about DCAT‑US 3. The specification is currently in Candidate Recommendation status, and DCAT‑US 3 is on the ArcGIS Hub roadmap. Once the standard is approved, our expectation is that DCAT‑US 3 support will be available in ArcGIS Hub within three months.

https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/arcgis-hub/data-management/arcgis-hub-catalog-feeds-support-dcat-rss-ogc#next

@neilmb @SueValente ^^, let's follow up on this either as data.gov or with the DCAT-US3 tiger team.

[chris-macdermaid]

@jbrown-xentity, thanks for raising that. I have a question about the standards and release process for the specification.

DCAT-US 3 is currently labeled a Candidate Recommendation Snapshot, which suggests the W3C standards maturity model used for DCAT.

However, most DCAT application profiles (e.g., DCAT-AP) are released as versioned specifications rather than progressing through the W3C Recommendation track.

Is there a plan for DCAT-US to progress to a W3C Recommendation, or will it instead follow a release model similar to DCAT-AP (e.g., versioned releases like 3.0.x)?

[neilmb]

Is there a plan for DCAT-US to progress to a W3C Recommendation, or will it instead follow a release model similar to DCAT-AP (e.g., versioned releases like 3.0.x)?

I know of no plans to involve our DCAT-US specification with any W3C process. The current plan as I understand it is to use a versioned model starting with DCAT-US 3.0.0 and in the future releasing updated versions of the schema by incrementing that version number.

[neilmb]

Emerging plan is to publish the Schema in this repo onto resources.data.gov around May 1st. Once that goes up, we should work with OMB and DOI to take down Infopolicy and DOI-DO web pages.

[cmarcum]

Is there a plan for DCAT-US to progress to a W3C Recommendation, or will it instead follow a release model similar to DCAT-AP (e.g., versioned releases like 3.0.x)?

I know of no plans to involve our DCAT-US specification with any W3C process. The current plan as I understand it is to use a versioned model starting with DCAT-US 3.0.0 and in the future releasing updated versions of the schema by incrementing that version number.

For context, the FAIRness project explicitly decided not to engage in the W3C Recs process mostly due to time constraints and resourcing. Using a versioned release format should be sufficient for the dev.