W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-comments@w3.org > June 2016

some comments on the DWBP draft

From: Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 18:29:17 -0700
To: "public-dwbp-comments@w3.org" <public-dwbp-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <da9b0371-d6b7-3da7-b946-66fc6671065d@lbl.gov>
Hi folks,

This comes from a colleague of mine.

-Annette


First, I'm really impressed. There is some great stuff there.

I didn't read it all (mostly in 4,6,16,20,29+), but...

1) The best practice topics cover a lot of the areas I think are 
important. I did not find much missing. Good coverage.

2) Reading more closely in a couple of sections I have more interest in 
I have some suggestions below.

-David


IMO Topic 8.13 is a little too focused on automated methods for "filling 
in missing values". I like the summary:

/Enrich your data by generating new data from the raw data when doing so 
will enhance its value.
/
but the text does not really address the "enhancement of value" part. It 
also seems weighted toward interpolation of data values as opposed to 
"generating new data". One way to get that cross would be to add


/Other examples include visual inspection to identify features in 
spatial data and cross-reference to external databases for demographic 
information. /[ *Lastly, generation of new data may be demand-driven, 
where missing values are calculated or otherwise determined by direct 
means. Measured application of these techniques informs the degree and 
direction of data enrichment*]

Do you think it's worth emphasizing that enrichment should be 
demonstrable? I see this as a QA issue.

-- 
Annette Greiner
NERSC Data and Analytics Services
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Received on Friday, 3 June 2016 01:29:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 June 2016 01:29:52 UTC