Should the cell-value URI Template be treated as a datatype?

At the F2F / TPAC, we talked about using URI Templates for cell-level values.

See [line 36, example url templates](https://gist.github.com/JeniT/147021e4408db090326f#file-example-url-templates-L36) from @JeniT's gist.

The object in this example defined as follows:

```
{
      "name": "species",
      "title": "Species",
      "dc:description": "The species of the tree.",
      "subjectUrl": "https://example.org/{GID}",
      "predicateUrl": "https://example.org/ns/species",
      "urlTemplate": "https://example.org/species/{species}",
      "datatype": "string"
}
```

I propose that instead of creating an additional metadata property `subjectUrl`, we use the `datatype` and add the URI Template in the accompanying `format` property ...

```
{
      "name": "species",
      "title": "Species",
      "dc:description": "The species of the tree.",
      "predicateUrl": "https://example.org/ns/species",
      "urlTemplate": "https://example.org/species/{species}",
      "datatype": "uriTemplate",
      "format": "https://example.org/{GID}"
}
```

Thoughts and comments. Seems a reasonable fit to me.

(I also note that this example includes the property `predicateUrl` - which is also not mentioned in the metadata vocabulary - but that's a discussion for another issue)


Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Should the cell-value URI Template be treated as a datatype? #96

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Should the cell-value URI Template be treated as a datatype? #96

Description

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions