W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-csv-wg@w3.org > April 2015

Re: Convenience suggestion: Allow metadata in a CSV file

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 07:26:26 -0400
Message-ID: <55421162.5000801@dbooth.org>
To: public-csv-wg@w3.org
Hi Jeni,

This approach would *not* require the publisher to amend existing CSV 
files.  The metadata is provided in a *separate* CSV file requiring no 
changes whatsoever to existing CSV formats.  Was the video unclear about 
that?  (Apologies if so.)

David Booth

On 04/30/2015 03:37 AM, Jeni Tennison wrote:
> Hi David,
> Yes, we did discuss this a earlier on and you might be aware of similar
> approaches in HXL [1] and Linked CSV [2].
> We decided to rule this out of scope for now, mostly because adoption
> would require publisher effort to amend existing CSV files and we only
> had time to address the 80% case.
> However, we have tried to ensure that the specifications support the
> scenario where someone (maybe a future incarnation of the group) defines
> a CSV-based syntax that includes embedded metadata. You'll see an
> example of how that could work in [3].
> Can you confirm that you're content with this response?
> Thanks,
> Jeni
> [1] http://hxlstandard.org/
> [2] http://jenit.github.io/linked-csv/
> [3]
> http://w3c.github.io/csvw/syntax/index.html#recognising-tabular-data-formats
> On 30 Apr 2015 03:43, "David Booth" <david@dbooth.org
> <mailto:david@dbooth.org>> wrote:
>     I don't know if the working group has already considered this, but
>     I'd like to suggest consider allowing CSV metadata to be specified
>     in another CSV file, as an alternative to JSON.  I have found this
>     approach to be quite convenient in a tool that I've been developing,
>     and I think it could increase uptake of a CSV metadata standard.
>     Here is a very short mockup video (2 minutes 59 seconds) that
>     illustrates this approach:
>     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmQWHdaN8_w
>     I realize that some CSV metadata authors may prefer JSON syntax.
>     But as simple as JSON is, spreadsheet competence is far more
>     widespread.  Also I would not blame anyone for being disinclined to
>     consider this approach given the late date.  But this approach only
>     involves different syntax -- not semantics -- and if it does indeed
>     lower the adoption barrier then it seems to me that it would be
>     worth considering.
>     What do others think?
>     Thanks,
>     David Booth
Received on Thursday, 30 April 2015 11:26:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 30 April 2015 11:26:55 UTC