W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-csv-wg@w3.org > June 2014

Re: New i18n use case [WAS: CSV use case]

From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 10:23:48 +0100
Message-ID: <538D9424.2090008@apache.org>
To: "Tandy, Jeremy" <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>, "public-csv-wg@w3.org" <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
On 02/06/14 10:19, Tandy, Jeremy wrote:
> Hi Andy - thanks for the comments. Some further clarification required; see below ...
>
> Jeremy
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andy Seaborne [mailto:andy@apache.org]
>> Sent: 31 May 2014 15:07
>> To: public-csv-wg@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: New i18n use case [WAS: CSV use case]
>>
>> On 30/05/14 20:36, Tandy, Jeremy wrote:
>>> Oh - and I should say that I focused on the HXL example rather than
>> the "360 giving" one because it touched on both the issues raised in
>> the email from Tim Davies.
>>>
>>> Jeremy
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Tandy, Jeremy [mailto:jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk]
>>>> Sent: 30 May 2014 18:04
>>>> To: Jeni Tennison; public-csv-wg@w3.org
>>>> Cc: Tim Davies (Web Foundation); david.megginson@megginson.com
>>>> Subject: New i18n use case [WAS: CSV use case]
>>>>
>>>> Hi - following Jeni's earlier message, I have now added another use
>>>> case to the document to describe the concerns raised: " Use Case #23
>>>> - Collating humanitarian information for crisis response"
>>>> <http://w3c.github.io/csvw/use-cases-and-requirements/#UC-
>>>> CollatingHumanitarianResponseInformation> ...
>>>>
>>>> You'll see this has introduced two new requirements:
>>>>
>>>> - <http://w3c.github.io/csvw/use-cases-and-requirements/#R-
>>>> MultilingualContent>
>>
>> "specify the language / locale relevant to each field"
>>
>> Minor terminology point (Rufus has mentioned something similar),
>> "field"
>> here is referring to all the cells in a column? (I'm reading from the
>> general context it isn't a particular (x,y) cell though that isn't
>> unimaginable).
>
> Fixed
>
>>
>>>> - <http://w3c.github.io/csvw/use-cases-and-requirements/#R-
>>>> ListsAsRepeatedFields>
>>
>> It could be either list or repeated objects (in RDF speak)?
>
> When thinking about this I wasn't projecting any ideas about the target
> RDF implementation. I hadn't considered the use of RDF Collections
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_collectionvocab> ... although I suppose
> I was thinking that the RDF would be simple repeated properties, so assuming
> all the 'geocode' columns map to, say,
> <http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/admingeo/gssCode> and the geocodes
> Themselves are somehow mapped to a URI (not really part of this example, but
> makes for a more "real" transformation), then the example ...
>
> geocode #1,geocode #2,geocode #3
>      530012,    530013,    530015
>
> ... becomes ...
>
> ex:resource
>    <http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/admingeo/gssCode> ex:530012, ex:530013, ex:530015 .
>
>
> Do you have any recommendations about modifying the text of the requirement?
> Certainly, I can include this trivial mapping. But I guess choice of target
> RDF is down to how the template is implemented?

A possible change:

R-ListsAsRepeatedFields ==> R-RepeatedFields

JSON conversion may have a parallel concern of [] vs values.

And XML, whether there is an enclosing element to wrap multiple items 
together or just repeated elements.

	Andy
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2014 09:24:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:21:40 UTC