Exclude Regions, cities from theme vocabulary


The term “Regions, cities” in the controlled vocabulary proposed in Annex II could be considered as a spatial/geographic characterization rather than a theme for the classification of datasets or catalogues. If you think, “Regions, cities” is not properly comparable to “”Agriculture, fisheries, forestry, food” for instance. Therefore, we propose to exclude “Regions, cities” from the current list of terms available in Annex II.


This issue has been reported by Gabriele Ciasullo, Giorgia Lodi and Antonio Rotundo:





Controlled vocabulary


Fri, 04/09/2015 - 17:44

+1 for "no change".


"Regions, cities" is a useful theme for e.g. data sets on tourism

Thu, 24/09/2015 - 10:06





Analysis: The term to be used as object of dcat:theme is an instance of the  class skos:Concept while terms to be used as objects of dct:spatial are instances of the class dct:Location. There seems to be no contradiction: the theme of a Dataset could be “Regions, cities” in general while the object of dct:spatial would be the URI of a specific city or region.

Proposal: No change.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.