Discussions on adding inverse DCAT properties have appeared in distinct issues (e.g., #1322 and #1335).
Some people feel DCAT should recommend only one direction of properties, essentially to avoid extra efforts when maintaining and consuming the metadata. Others argue that inverse properties are not that difficult to maintain.

A middle-out option would be supporting inverse properties with a "lightweight approach" such as the one adopted by PROV-O (https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#inverse-names).

The idea is to avoid inverse properties (unless grounded explicitly by use cases). But rather, to claim in the DCAT Appendix the name of the inverse properties to ensure interoperability in case any specific application needs to use the non-recommended inverse properties.
In a recent DCAT teleconference, we started discussing whether this strategy is suitable for DCAT, and we agreed on following/exploring the PROV approach for inverse properties (see https://www.w3.org/2021/03/17-dxwgdcat-minutes#r02).

What do group members and contributors think about this approach?