Inconsistences between schema and example files

[IgorBalog-Eng]

While implementing new catalog classes following schema and provided example files I have discovered that there are some differences between schema and examples. Here are those differences:

https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/ids-specification/blob/main/catalog/message/schema/dataset-schema.json

Dataset

"odrl:hasPolicy": {
	"type": "array",
	"items": {
		"$ref": "https://w3id.org/dspace/schemas/2024/1/contract-schema.json#/definitions/Offer"
	},
	"minItems": 1
},

in example not as array ( "odrl:hasPolicy" : [ {):

"odrl:hasPolicy": {
    "@type": "odrl:Offer",
    "@id": "urn:uuid:2828282:3dd1add8-4d2d-569e-d634-8394a8836a88",

---

"Distribution": {
dct:format not defined in schema

example:
https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/ids-specification/blob/main/catalog/message/example/dataset.json

 "dcat:distribution": [
    {
      "@type": "dcat:Distribution",
      "dct:format": {
        "@id": "dspace:s3+push"
      },

---

example catalog:
Catalog->dcat:dataset->dcat:distribution->"dct:format": "dspace:s3+push",
vs
example dataset
"dct:format": {
"@id": "dspace:s3+push"
}

Missing:
dataset->dcat:distribution->dcat:accessService->"@type": "dcat:DataService",

---

example catalog
dcat:dataset->odrl:hasPolicy
"dspace:providerId": "http://example.com/Provider",
missing @id of the policy/offer

vs defined Offer object in negotiation schema
https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/ids-specification/blob/main/negotiation/message/schema/contract-schema.json

Hope I managed to collect all differences for catalog and referenced objects from negotiation module.
It could be also that I did not read schema files correct and this ticket is not applicable.

[sebbader-sap]

Adding another one:

ids-specification/negotiation/message/schema/contract-schema.json

Line 156 in 63e5a40

"@target",

should be "odrl:target"

[IgorBalog-Eng]

Is this diagram still valid?
There is "link" between offer and catalog
https://docs.internationaldataspaces.org/ids-knowledgebase/v/dataspace-protocol/catalog/catalog.protocol#id-3.1-ack-catalog
It states before
A Catalog must not have an odrl:hasPolicy attribute, since it is not intended to negotiate on the access to Catalog objects.

[schoenenberg]

Adding another one:

ids-specification/negotiation/message/schema/contract-schema.json

Line 156 in 63e5a40

"@target",

should be "odrl:target"

Already reported (but not yet fixed) in #232

[IgorBalog-Eng]

https://docs.internationaldataspaces.org/ids-knowledgebase/v/dataspace-protocol/contract-negotiation/contract.negotiation.protocol#id-2.1-contract-request-message
Link to message points to offer_message not contract_request_message

[IgorBalog-Eng]

The Consumer must include an offer property, which itself must have a @id property

https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/ids-specification/blob/main/negotiation/message/example/contract-request-message.json

Where is offer.@id?
Initial message contains offer.@id

--

https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/ids-specification/blob/2024-1/catalog/message/example/catalog.json
Should this one also contain offer.@id in response? How will consumer know which offer.@id to send in initial_request_message?

"odrl:hasPolicy": [
{
"@type": "odrl:Offer",
"@id" : "missing offerId",
"dspace:providerId": "http://example.com/Provider",
"odrl:permission": [
{

[sebbader-sap]

The example for the catalog contains a odrl:EQ:

ids-specification/catalog/message/example/catalog.json

Line 49 in b3ff872

"odrl:operator": "odrl:EQ",

But ODRL only has a odrl:eq, which is correctly stated in the JSON Schema.

Additionally, the distribution in this file is a JSON Object:

ids-specification/catalog/message/example/catalog.json

Line 60 in b3ff872

"dcat:distribution": {

But the JSON Schema says it must be a JSON Array.

[IgorBalog-Eng]

https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/ids-specification/blob/main/negotiation/message/schema/contract-schema.json#L156
required element @target; should this one be changed with odrl:target?