> In the examples given so far, we have cases of a Profile that has both an "actionable as code" implementation and a "merely document" implementation, see how the existing DCAT-AP profiling of DCAT is documented with both SHACL and document implementations!
Yes, I now start to grasp that. My view so far had been that there is a profile URI that (per content negotiation) resolves to human-readable and machine-understandable profile descriptions/definitions. From there (i. e. the profile URI) there are links to other documentation and to machine-processable versions of the profile (e. g. XML Schema, ShEx etc.).
Those two approaches are obviously something we need to discuss as a group so I'm happy to see that there is plenty of time scheduled at the Genoa meeting.
Previous message: Nicholas Car via GitHub: "Re: [dxwg] Allow license property to link to other than LicenseDocument"