This is probably too late for this round, but re-reading the spec I realize that the naming of dcat:catalog is not great: if follows the same convention as dcat:service, dcat:record and dcat:dataset, but instead of linking to a resource that is being catalogues, it links to a resource that catalogues. The naming could instead have better represented that the case here is to represent a part (and that the superproperty is dcterms:hasPart).

For future work?